Response to interpellation 2023/24:521 on Sweden's engagement in Afghanistan
Translated from Swedish by AI; the translation may contain errors. The Swedish text is the original.
Summary AI, written in advance
M argues that the conditions for aid in Afghanistan have deteriorated significantly due to the Taliban regime's decrees and oppression against women and girls. M emphasizes that Sweden should not provide support that legitimizes the Taliban's rule or their conditions. 1 M argues that Sweden, as a major donor, must make trade-offs and prioritize countries where the greatest success and efficiency can be achieved 1. 2 M believes that S does not finance its input in its own budget 2. 3 4 S argues that it is possible to conduct effective aid on the ground in Afghanistan through organizations and the UN 3 4. 5 S argues that the government must not let 20 years of successes go to waste by withdrawing 5. 4 S criticizes the government for cutting support to UN agencies that enable aid without money reaching the Taliban regime 4. 2 M will continue to work on the issue of Afghanistan and present its idea for the way forward later in the year 2.
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! She has asked me how I view Sweden's long-term commitment in Afghanistan. She has also asked me why the government chooses to cut support to UN agencies operating in Afghanistan and why the government is reducing development aid to the country.
Afghanistan is one of the largest recipient countries of Swedish aid. Last year, Sweden contributed nearly 900 million kronor to Afghanistan. Of these, 364 million kronor constituted humanitarian aid. At the same time, the Taliban's takeover has caused the conditions for positive societal development to change fundamentally. Not least, the possibilities to deliver effective aid have deteriorated significantly. A large number of decrees limiting the Afghan population's civil and political rights have been issued by the Taliban regime. Women and girls are particularly affected by these orders. Afghan women have, among other things, been forbidden from working within the UN and other aid organizations.
During the last year, the Taliban regime also issued a special decree against Sweden with the implication that Swedish activities are prohibited in Afghanistan. This makes an already difficult context even more difficult and affects Sweden's opportunities to assist the population. The consequences of this affect the Afghan population, who are in great need of assistance.
New conditions require new decisions and new solutions. We shall not provide support for anything that legitimizes the Taliban's rule. We can never accept conditions from the Taliban that contribute to the discrimination of women and girls.
Our development aid must be able to be conducted safely, effectively, sustainably and with clear results. It cannot be based in the long term on exceptions and dictates from the Taliban regime. Our support is directed directly to the Afghan people.
Alexandra Völker (S)
Madam Speaker! The Taliban's takeover of power is as much a tragedy as it is a failure for civil society. Just as the Minister for Development Cooperation expresses in his response, the development under the Taliban regime is now going completely in the wrong direction.
This makes the aid that we provide and the international community's presence even more important. If we do not hold on now, then all the development that has been achieved over the last 20 years will definitely be lost, and the biggest losers in this are Afghanistan's girls and women.
Even though it is absolutely a complex environment and the decree against Swedish operations plays a role, the common message from all aid organizations and international organizations that I encounter is that it is possible to work in Afghanistan and that we need to work in Afghanistan.
Save the Children works with support from among others Sweden for children's safety, protection and education with a focus on girls' rights. They work themselves and with partners in 17 provinces and today have approximately 4,000 employees, of which 40 percent are women.
IRC, which also has funding from Sweden, works in health, economic recovery and development. They currently have 4,823 employees, of whom also approximately 40 percent are women. Women also work in all 13 provinces where they are active.
Hand in Hand Afghanistan works to combat poverty and promote women's economic empowerment through entrepreneurship and job creation. They have also been able to retain all of their female employees.
Marie Stopes International, which provides support within SRHR, is present in 18 provinces, partially funded by Sweden. All of their activities are conducted by women for women.
Even today, thousands of women are performing an invaluable work on the ground in Afghanistan. It is possible to continue providing effective aid on the ground that benefits the Afghan people. It is needed.
An estimated 23.7 million people, that is more than half of the population in Afghanistan, will need humanitarian assistance this year. Only 7.8 percent of the economic need is funded.
In addition to the Taliban regime, climate change is creating devastating consequences for the Afghan population. That we continue to provide extensive aid is absolutely crucial for the country's development.
I was not entirely enlightened by the Minister for Development Cooperation's answer, and therefore I still wonder how the government views the long-term commitment and the development cooperation work in Afghanistan.
Statsrådet Johan Forssell (M)
Madam Speaker! I thank Alexandra Völker for the interpellation.
To begin with, we should remember one thing, namely that last year Sweden contributed nearly 900 million kronor to Afghanistan. It is a substantial contribution. There are few countries that contribute more than Sweden to Afghanistan. After Afghanistan had been the largest recipient of bilateral aid, it has decreased a little, but the country continues to constitute a major partner for Sweden. Sometimes one can get the impression in the discussion that it would be different. That was the case last year. Of the level of 900 million kronor, just over a third was humanitarian aid. That is the background I believe we agree on, that is to say that the needs are great.
Our Swedish support has focused on a number of different things. Not least, I would like to highlight the support for women and girls, who unfortunately are those who suffer the most under the Taliban regime's oppression. That is fundamentally what is happening; it is a brutal oppression where people, especially women and girls, are denied their basic human freedoms and rights.
The conditions have changed, and they have changed quite seriously in the sense that the possibilities to reach out with aid have deteriorated. The responsibility for that falls one hundred percent on the Taliban regime. It is the Taliban regime that has as a fundamental idea to oppress its own population, which has as an idea to also shut out major serious partners like Sweden. We can see this in the civil society organizations that previously operated in the country and which now face a completely different reality. I can only regret that the Taliban regime acts in that way, but the responsibility for that must be placed on the Taliban regime. I can further regret that it is already vulnerable groups that are most often affected the most.
Sweden has a bilateral aid strategy with Afghanistan. It also applies this year, that is, during the months remaining of 2024. We will return with proposals for continuation, but we are not there now. We follow our normal working methodology, which means that well before the strategy expires, we will present our continued work.
We know that the needs are great. We also know that the possibility to act has changed fundamentally. We are not making any different analysis there than many other EU countries. We have discussed this a lot, not least at the aid minister meeting. That very balance point of helping people in the long term without in any way legitimizing a Taliban regime that oppresses its own population is not always completely easy to find. It is quite complicated. One cannot claim anything else than that.
Alexandra Völker (S)
Madam Speaker! I cannot help but still feel a certain concern when I listen to the Minister for Development Cooperation and the way one speaks about Afghanistan and the developments. We are in complete agreement that it is a terrible development, and we are in complete agreement on the view of the Taliban regime.
But the Minister for Foreign Affairs returns to the question of responsibility. Who bears the responsibility? The Taliban regime bears absolute responsibility. But is it really the people who should bear the consequences? If we choose to withdraw, it is the people in Afghanistan who are affected. It is the girls and the women who are hit hardest. Then 20 years of successes are lost. They are not today, not fully, but they definitely are if we withdraw.
I agree that it is clearly problematic that a decree has been designed directly against Sweden. An organization that has carried out incredibly important work there, namely the Swedish Afghanistan Committee, has now been forced to pause its work. But it must not limit our aid.
The aid sphere is very clear on this, namely that it is possible to provide aid in Afghanistan, effective aid that reaches the population, and we must take advantage of that. How do we ensure that it is not Afghanistan's girls and women who pay the price? Shall we really let 20 years of work go to waste?
Statsrådet Johan Forssell (M)
Madam Speaker! We know that the needs are great, but it is certainly a complicating factor if the possibilities for a donor such as Sweden change fundamentally, if the regime says that we are no longer welcome. One cannot pretend that it has no impact. It is clear that it makes things more difficult! There are also security aspects to take into account here.
I can only repeat what I have said, namely that Sweden is still one of the largest donors. We have a strategy that applies for 2024, and we will return according to the principles we have regarding how we view the continuation in the country. But there are a number of months left in the year.
Then I want to introduce a perspective that perhaps is missing in the debate, namely that we unfortunately live in a world with great global needs. I agree that they are great in Afghanistan, and I think it is appalling that the civilian population suffers because of the oppression that the Taliban regime exerts, not least against women and girls. It is deplorable. That is also why we have engaged ourselves so much in different ways, not least to try to find a common position in the EU circle so that we work together. We shall help people without legitimizing the Taliban regime. Otherwise, it could become an even worse situation ahead.
But Sweden, as a major donor, must also take a great responsibility for the whole. There, we must also consider how we work most effectively. In which countries do we have the greatest potential to achieve long-term results? That must also be a factor in the aid policy and a Swedish aid that is generous but not unlimited. We have an economic framework to adhere to. An intervention that takes place in one country could have taken place in another country, and then one must compare the results. Where can we lift the most people out of poverty? Where are the conditions best to, for example, combat corruption, so that there is an impact? It is that type of perspective we often bring into aid, and unfortunately, it has been lacking for a long time. Perhaps it is an explanation for why so many countries that for many years, sometimes several decades, have received Swedish development aid continue to be in such great need of aid, to be corrupt and deny people their basic civil and political rights.
I am not saying that it is the only perspective in this. On the contrary! But I note that the perspective is often omitted. As long as the aid budget is large but not unlimited – we agree with the Social Democrats, and we have essentially the same level of our aid – we must always, as a major aid donor, make those types of trade-offs. Where can we achieve the greatest successes, and where can we help the most people, regardless of whether it concerns Afghanistan or some other recipient country?
Alexandra Völker (S)
Madam Speaker! I note once again that the Minister for Development Cooperation returns to precisely the Taliban regime. Is it really the Taliban regime we are to listen to? Is that not in itself almost to actually accept its will? It is the people in Afghanistan who are affected.
It is possible to carry out aid work in Afghanistan. I have highlighted several organizations that, also with the support of Swedish funds, carry out effective aid work in Afghanistan.
We have the UN. The UN has stepped in as a huge party in Afghanistan. Thanks to the UN organizations, it is possible today to carry out aid work without money reaching the Taliban-controlled state apparatus. A separate economic system has been created that makes it actually possible to continue carrying out effective aid work. It is absolutely fantastic.
Despite this, the government chooses to cut the support, also specifically to the UN and the UN's work in Afghanistan. Compared to 2021, the budget is a reduction of 40 percent. It is therefore the UN that ensures that it is possible to provide support and carry out important, completely life-saving aid work in Afghanistan.
I continue to mean that we cannot let 20 years of work go to waste. We cannot let the Taliban regime win, and we cannot let Afghanistan's women and girls pay the price.
Statsrådet Johan Forssell (M)
Madam Speaker! Yes, there is no doubt that the problems in Afghanistan are great. That is also why we have been so involved as a major donor, not only bilaterally but also to achieve consensus within the EU circle on these issues. The EU is, after all, a significant donor.
I can also observe that there are somewhat different views on the way forward. It sounds to Alexandra Völker as if this is incredibly simple, but I want to say that it is significantly more complicated than that.
With the Taliban regime, we have a new situation. We have, for example, security issues for Swedish aid workers to take into account. And the Taliban regime says that we should apologize for our freedom of speech. Sweden as a nation should apologize, otherwise we will not be allowed to continue working.
From the Swedish government's side, we have clearly and distinctly stated that we do not intend to do so. Our position is based on the strong principled stance that in order to be able to achieve results in the type of cooperation that we see development aid provides, one must have mutual respect. It is difficult to have that with a regime that has as its fundamental idea to oppress its own people.
Then I want to repeat that Sweden continues to be a major donor. Last year we gave 900 million kronor, of which a little over a third is specifically humanitarian aid. We will return to the continuation in the usual order.
I note the Social Democrats' input in this. I also note that the Social Democrats do not finance that input in their own budget. Words, actions, and figures do not align here. It is easy to speak warmly about allocating more money to aid. But then one must also finance it, otherwise it is difficult to understand what those words are worth. I note that the Social Democrats do not do it. It is certainly something we will have reason to return to.
We will continue to work on the issue of Afghanistan, and we will present our idea for the way forward later in the year.
Thank you, Alexandra Völker, for this interpellation debate!
Source: The Swedish Parliament. The speeches come from the open data of the Riksdag, translated into English by AI, which may contain errors.