Response to interpellation 2024/25:331 on human rights in relation to trade with Israel
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 government is working to ensure international law principles in trade agreements with Israel and that the association agreement requires compliance with these. M emphasizes that settlement products do not have the right to customs benefits and that the government is acting for EU sanctions against extremist settlers. M advocates for dialogue and deepened cooperation with Israel rather than a boycott. M considers that Hamas bears the responsibility for the events on October 7 and that terrorist ideology has caused the suffering 1. M emphasizes that the government has doubled the support to the region 1. 2 3 M thinks it is good to have trade with Israel and that Swedish companies and consumers should have freedom of choice 2 3. 4 M argues that Israel is a democratic state governed by the rule of law where Palestinians enjoy more rights than in neighboring countries, that the settlement policy is a major problem and that a two-state solution should be built 4. 5 M emphasizes that Israel has the right to defend itself against Hamas's terror attacks and that the government wants to see a de-escalation and continued ceasefire 5.
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 Benjamin Dousa (M)
Mr. Speaker! Lorena Delgado Varas has asked me how I work to ensure that international law principles are respected in the trade agreements that Sweden is a part of, especially in relation to Israel. Lorena Delgado Varas further asks if I intend to work within the EU for a review of the association agreement with Israel on the grounds of the country's violations of international law and international humanitarian law.
She has also asked me what analyses I and the government have made after the International Court of Justice demanded that third countries should not facilitate Israel's occupation of Palestine, and any measures that will be taken in connection with this. Finally, she also asks how I view the need for a renewed Swedish strategy for peacebuilding in the region, in light of the escalated conflicts and the position of international law.
EU's trade with Israel is regulated by WTO rules and the association agreement between the EU and Israel that entered into force in 2022. The purpose of the association agreement is, among other things, to ensure compliance with international law principles. I think that is a very important point. Without an association agreement, it is very difficult for the EU to, for example, take legal actions.
The rules for Sweden's trade with Israel are the same as for all EU countries. The starting point is partly the WTO's basic rules and agreements, and partly the association agreement between the EU and Israel, where the EU has clarified that the agreements apply to the State of Israel within the 1967 borders. The Government attaches great importance to the differentiation between Israel and the occupied territories that the EU's association agreement with Israel establishes. Settlement products are not entitled to duty-free status or other customs benefits. According to EU legislation, it is required that goods from settlements must be origin-marked so that it is clear to the consumer whether a product comes from Israel or from a settlement.
The International Court of Justice's opinion coincides in crucial parts with the EU's policy. Neither Sweden nor the EU has recognized the occupation as legal or recognized the annexation of East Jerusalem. The EU and its member states also do not recognize any changes to the 1967 borders that the parties have not agreed upon. The EU has expressed support for the Palestinian people's unconditional right to self-determination. In other parts as well, the opinion coincides, for example, in that the settlements violate international law. The expansion of settlements, demolitions, and evictions must cease. The settlement policy violates international law, undermines the two-state solution, and contributes to an elevated level of conflict. The Government is clear that settler violence, settlement expansion, demolitions, and evictions must cease and acts for further EU sanctions against extremist settlers.
The Government simultaneously welcomes that the EU and Israel have agreed to hold an association council within the framework of the association agreement and a high-level dialogue with Palestine shortly thereafter. A high-level dialogue with Palestine will be an opportunity to discuss the importance of strengthening and reforming the Palestinian Authority. The association council will be an important opportunity to conduct a dialogue on, among other things, the international law principles that the EU's policy in relation to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is based on. The Government considers, among other things, that Israel's responsibility in relation to the catastrophic humanitarian situation in Gaza should specifically be raised with Israel at this occasion.
In line with the EU, the government does not support a boycott of or sanctions against Israel. We believe in dialogue and consider that a good bilateral relationship where we can both advocate for deepened cooperation and voice criticism in difficult issues is the way forward. Sweden has a long-term interest in deepening the relationship and cooperation with Israel, which, like Sweden, has advanced innovation and research.
The government appears consistent, just like the EU, in favor of a peaceful development in the Middle East.
We welcome, together with the rest of the EU, the announcement of a ceasefire in Gaza, which, among other things, means that parts of the hostages are released and paves the way towards a more lasting end to the hostilities. It is now crucial that the ceasefire is also implemented and that it also contributes to alleviating the enormous suffering of the civilian population in Gaza.
The demands for respect for international law, including international humanitarian law, have been – and continue to be – one of the government's key messages. The government's conviction is that we have the greatest opportunity to influence when we act collectively with others. We have a close dialogue, not least within the EU and with other like-minded countries, on how we can best and most effectively ensure respect for international humanitarian law.
Lorena Delgado Varas (V)
Mr. Speaker! No one can accuse the government of being forward-looking or of developing its policy in any way according to reality. The Minister says that these are difficult questions. He says that now, when more than 480 days of genocide have passed.
It has been 480 days where at least 47,000 people have been murdered, of which at least 18,000 are children. At least 100,000 have been mutilated. The UN agency UNRWA states that ten children have lost a leg or both legs every day, and they have had to perform amputations with little or no anesthesia due to Israel's blockade.
It is 480 days, and 80 percent of Gaza is totally destroyed. The ceasefire that the minister mentioned provides a pause in Gaza. But instead, Israel has escalated the violence in the West Bank. Now, many there are being murdered, injured, or kidnapped by the Israeli state.
Despite all this, the government's position is that dialogue with Israel is the answer. And not only that, but it would prefer a deepening of the cooperation rather than using the association agreement as it should be used, as a tool to strengthen human rights.
In one of the initial articles in the association agreement, it states: The agreement rests on respect for human rights and democratic principles. Against the background of that text, I can think that the government's view on human rights and democratic principles is truly skewed.
The Minister also does not answer the question regarding the measures that will be taken after the International Court of Justice demanded that third countries should not facilitate Israel's occupation of Palestine.
I mean that it is an incredibly important question to answer, given that Sweden must follow the International Court of Justice's decision. Most experts believe that sanctions against a few settlers do not quite measure up as a response to such a serious judgment.
I would like to take the opportunity to remind the Minister and everyone listening of how the government has done everything to stop the possibilities for a ceasefire and to stop the genocide.
When the UN presented the proposal for an immediate ceasefire in Gaza, the government chose to abstain. When the UN presented the proposal requiring Israel to withdraw from the occupied territories, the government chose to abstain.
Now Israel has banned the UN agency UNRWA, and Sweden has stopped the support, after they themselves have been involved in undermining UNRWA's reputation in the global community.
The government is simply undermining the entire Swedish people's work with human rights. They are undermining Swedish companies by not being clear that one does not do business with occupying powers, that one does not do business with apartheid states, and that one does not do business with perpetrators of genocide.
In Israel's case, one signs off on all these three abominable crimes. Despite this, the government chooses dialogue and deepened cooperation. It is a disgrace.
Jacob Risberg (MP)
Madam Speaker! Thank you, Lorena Delgado Varas, for initiating this interpellation debate! Thank you also to the Minister, who is here to answer the questions!
It is very much about trade with Israel and about trade with goods from occupied territories. It is this that I also intend to concentrate on.
It is welcome that there will finally be an association agreement between Israel and the EU. It was requested by the EU already in May, was it, last year. It has thus taken nine months to even agree on a date. It is shameful. One could actually have pressured Israel during that time by saying: Yes, but then we pause the association agreement until you come to the negotiating table. It is actually Israel that has dragged its feet during these nine months. It is not the EU. The EU was ready to enter and negotiate with Israel immediately regarding the association agreement.
The International Court of Justice issued an opinion in July last year stating that the occupation is illegal, that the settlement policy and the settlements are illegal, that the settlements must cease, and that all settlers must leave the occupied territories. It was a very powerful statement. The statement also requires all of the world's states to ensure that they do not contribute to a continued occupation policy and do not contribute to continuing to maintain the settlements.
The UN General Assembly voted through a resolution that the settlements shall be emptied within one year.
The Minister states in his answer that the trade agreements apply the same for the entire EU towards Israel. But then it is interesting to note that Sweden is actually a part of the EU, and Sweden actually has a large part in saying what one thinks and feels in these issues. One cannot hide behind the EU all the time. It would be a bit interesting to know what Sweden is driving regarding these issues within the EU.
The Minister also speaks about the labeling of goods from the settlements. It should be easy for consumers to see which goods come from settlements and which come from Israel, within the recognized borders. But the labeling only applies to certain products. It applies primarily to food, meat, and other foodstuffs. It does not apply to industrial products. It does not apply to composite goods. There, we have no possibility of knowing whether the goods are produced in occupied territory or not, or in settlements or not.
The same applies to the duty-free status. I think it is very good that there is a difference between goods from settlements and goods from Israel. But it is up to each customs authority to go through postal code lists to determine which goods should be subject to customs duties. It is a task where it is about random spot checks rather than going through every single item. It is not sustainable.
Based on the International Court of Justice's ruling that Sweden now has a duty not to contribute to the prolongation of the occupation policy and not in any way contribute financially to the maintenance of the settlements, I would like to know: Will Sweden push for a complete ban on trade with goods from the Israeli settlements? All trade with goods from Israeli settlements de facto contributes to an economic compensation or an economic contribution to these settlements, which contradicts the International Court of Justice's statement. Will Sweden push for such a ban?
At some point in February, an association council is to be held. What red lines does Sweden have towards Israel in the upcoming association council?
I would like to have answers to these questions from the Minister.
Fredrik Saweståhl (M)
Madam Speaker! It is truly noticeable what great commitment there is for these issues. I thought that in this context I would focus on a couple of things that have been mentioned in the debate.
To begin with, I recoiled at the word apartheid, which is mentioned in the interpellation. I think it is problematic when horrific and abominable historical events are compared with other bad historical events. Just as one should not compare the Holocaust with other things, one should not compare the apartheid system in South Africa with other things. Criticize this for what it is! Do not claim that anything else is the same, because it actually is not!
Then the discussion returns about that Sweden should not care, that Sweden should have stepped back, and that Sweden was somehow not engaged. At the same time, we know that the government has doubled the support to this region. It is something that I think we should take with us. We can end up behind the fact that we have a commitment. We have doubled the support to the region. We really want to make a difference.
Then it is actually positive - I hope that the government makes good use of this opportunity - that there will finally be an association council with Israel. We have requested it from all possible sides and angles in meetings in the Committee on Foreign Affairs. It is very good that this is happening. The EU and Sweden, together, will be able to have a positive effect on the development in Israel and also on the development in the Palestinian territories.
I will go back to what has happened. What started on October 7 was fundamentally unnecessary. It would never have happened if not for Hamas consisting of such sick people, as they actually are. It is their terror ideology, their hatred, and their antisemitism that has caused all the suffering in the Gaza Strip. This is nothing other than Hamas's responsibility.
The pogrom of October 7, 2023 - the worst that has struck the Israeli and the Jewish people since World War II - should never have happened. Hamas bears the responsibility. They must take the responsibility. They have no place in a future free Palestine. They have no place in a future world where the Palestinian people shall be allowed to live in peace, freedom and security, just like the Israeli. They shall live in a democracy, live with human rights and actually get the life they deserve, not the life they are subjected to by the terrorists who oppress them.
Statsrådet Benjamin Dousa (M)
Madam Speaker! I think we should remember what actually happened. What happened was that Hamas broke through into Israel, went to festivals and shot young people and kidnapped young people, families and children who had nothing to do with this. On the contrary, there were many in the peace movement who lived along the Gaza Strip on legal Israeli land.
Does the Left Party mean that those who lost their loved ones, their relatives, and who perhaps still have their loved ones locked behind Hamas terror should go to their companies, to their employers and perhaps not get a job and not be allowed to sell to the European market, even though it is they who have been subjected to Hamas's brutal terror? Is that how the Left Party's policy is to be interpreted when it comes to Israel?
We have spent the entire morning discussing and debating this issue in a friendly tone. I think the debates have been very constructive. Miljöpartiet, Socialdemokraterna, Moderaterna and the government, which I represent, disagree on a number of issues. But in the broad sense, we all stand behind international law. We all want to de-escalate the situation.
We have increased the humanitarian support. I suspect that if MP and the Social Democrats had been in government, they would have done roughly the same thing. Then we can discuss escort programs and other things, and exactly what direction the long-term development work in Västbanken should take. But fundamentally, we share the same view of reality and the same instincts in these issues. But here, the Left Party truly seems to be different in relation to all other parties in the Swedish Riksdag.
At the same time as Israel, in order to get back the hostages who were kidnapped by Hamas, is now releasing convicted terrorists who have murdered people, Nooshi Dadgostar comes out and praises this and thinks that it is positive that these terrorists are now being released. She thus equates terrorists who are convicted in a court in a democratic country with hostages who have been kidnapped by one of the most brutal terrorist sects on the planet.
No - I am very, very far from Vänsterpartiet when it comes to these issues. I think it is good that we have trade with Israel. I think it is good that the people who just want to live in peace get to produce and sell to the European market, while at the same time we are very careful that the settlement policy must cease and that the products and goods sold from there shall not be granted the same access to the internal and free market as other Israeli goods.
Lorena Delgado Varas (V)
Madam Speaker! It is very easy to stigmatize the Palestinian people. It is about Muslims, and everyone knows what Muslims are.
The Minister does not mention at all all the released children and all those who are held in administrative detention in Israeli prisons, who have thus been kidnapped by the Israeli state.
To highlight the situation, I just want to point out: Yes - Israel has an apartheid system. Yes - Israel is committing genocide. No - Israel is not a democratic state, because in a democratic state, one does not discriminate against people based on background.
I now return to the discussion on what the Swedish government should and should not do towards Israel.
In the Swedish strategy towards Israel, which the minister does not mention whether they intend to change or not, it is argued that a large part of the strategy involves trade and research collaborations. The Swedish government's interest in the Israeli business sector is therefore based on supporting something that has been built up through occupation and apartheid. This is prioritized over human rights.
The Minister also mentioned in his answer that our relationship with Israel follows certain agreements. Against that background, I want to highlight one of the international agreements that we actually shall follow, and that is the genocide convention.
More and more organizations and experts argue that what is happening is a genocide. Most recently, Amnesty International presented a report where the conclusion is that Israel is committing genocide against the Palestinian people. Already at the beginning of last year, UN special rapporteur Francesca Albanese stated that Israel has specifically committed three acts of genocide with the requisite intent: to cause serious bodily or mental harm to members of the Palestinian group, to deliberately inflict upon the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part, and to impose measures intended to prevent births within the group.
According to the genocide convention, we are obliged to act in the case of suspected genocide. That is to say, we do not even need to wait for the international court, but we can act after a collective assessment.
Since the governments have not acted, it has been up to the people to defend international law and stand up for Palestine. Right now, more and more people are joining the BDS movement, which means boycott, divestment, sanctions regarding Israel.
Several companies have gone bankrupt or had to shut down parts of their operations due to the boycott. Some that are boycotted in Sweden today are McDonalds, Starbucks, Lidl, Aimpoint, Israeli fruit and Israeli vegetables, Israeli alcohol and so on. Other companies can be added to the list, for example Volvo, Ikea and so on. Today we see how retailers at Willys and Ica try to hide Israeli goods or simply write other countries of origin on the signs, because they know that people will not shop for products from Israel.
Would it not be more dignified to stand up for human rights and terminate the association agreement with Israel and introduce sanctions?
Jacob Risberg (MP)
Madam Speaker! First, I must react to what the Moderate member who joined the interpellation debate spoke about here.
In the West Bank, Palestinians and Israelis travel on different roads depending on whether they are Palestinians or Israelis. In the West Bank, Palestinians and Israelis settle in different places depending on whether they are Palestinians or Israelis.
Regarding access to different areas, different rules apply. Israelis have significantly greater freedom to move within the entire West Bank, while Palestinians must pass through checkpoints or be located within enclosed areas.
Different laws apply to people who are located in or live in the West Bank. If you are a Palestinian, you live under Israeli military laws. A 14-year-old boy can be imprisoned without suspicion and held in custody, while Israeli settlers live under Israeli civil laws. They are completely different legal systems. Where do we recognize this from?
20 years ago, a South African judge visited Israel and the occupied territories and said: Absolutely - this is apartheid. But it is actually worse than the apartheid that existed in South Africa. In South Africa, the government did everything it could to get the blacks in South Africa to work. But in Israel, they do everything they can to prevent Palestinians from working.
When even South Africans themselves say that this is apartheid, I think that we too can call it apartheid.
Now I want to return to the question that I actually had for Benjamin Dousa and for which I received no answer: Based on the international court's statement, will the government push for a total ban on trade with goods from Israeli settlements?
Fredrik Saweståhl (M)
Madam Speaker! It is obvious that we do not share the same view on this issue. I do not think it is reasonable to make these comparisons, because it is not about comparable things.
The State of Israel is a democratic state governed by the rule of law, a functioning country where people who are Palestinians actually enjoy more rights and live more freely and better than in all the other countries around them. This must be kept separate from what is happening in the occupied territories. What is happening there is a major problem. That we agree on; we have just stood here and agreed that the settlement policy is an Achilles' heel and a major problem for Israel. However, this does not mean that one can assert what is asserted in the interpellation, nor the other superlatives used here regarding what is going on.
We must never forget that this began with Hamas's attacks against Israel on October 7, 2023. We must never forget that what has happened in recent years has been caused by Hamas. We must never forget that the future must be built on the fact that we, just as the government and most of us think, manage to create a two-state solution where a free and democratic Israel lives in peace and security neighboring a free, safe, secure and democratic Palestine where people actually have civil rights - which they do lack today if they happen to live in Lebanon, Syria or Jordan, because these countries deny people the right to integrate where they actually are.
That policy will not work. The policy that will work is a policy that says: Now we are building a new state. Now we are building a new future for this region.
The window is open. The ceasefire and the changes that have occurred over the past year and a bit more are an opportunity. Let us take that opportunity to build a better future! Let us not bury ourselves in trivialities, boycotts and other small nonsense that will not work.
Statsrådet Benjamin Dousa (M)
Madam Speaker! In the Middle East policy and specifically in the Israel-Palestine issue, the parties in the Riksdag have slightly different starting points. But there is one party that really stands out, and that is the Left Party. I become genuinely worried when I see what the Left Party writes on Twitter and debates here and elsewhere. Furthermore, we have not received any clear answer from the opposition. Will Nooshi be Sweden's Minister for Foreign Affairs if there is a change of power? Will the Left Party decide which organizations in the region receive aid money and over Sweden's overall trade policy?
I am going to tell the Left Party one thing: I believe in freedom. That might sound new to the Left Party. It is not something you advocate for in any issue at all.
Lorena Delgado Varas points out that individual businesses and companies, for example shops, remove Israeli goods or place them in some specific location. She also points out that there are Swedish consumers who choose not to buy Israeli, regardless of whether it comes from occupied territory or legal Israel. But isn't it fantastic that Swedish people and companies get to decide for themselves what they should consume, buy and sell, and how they should live their lives? I understand that it sounds like a radical thought for a Left Party member that people and companies should get to decide for themselves, but it is what I believe in.
I believe that quite a few people in Sweden can imagine buying goods and services from, for example, companies that now have hostages in Gaza, kidnapped by Hamas. Vänsterpartiet needs to do much more to counter what appear to be quite widespread anti-Semitic values within its own party. I think, in any case, that Israel has the right to exist and defend itself.
I think it is good that we trade with other countries. It is also something that Vänsterpartiet is very skeptical about. It is not just about Israel. You are critical of trade with actually all countries. Perhaps you can imagine free trade agreements with Cuba and Venezuela.
I believe that Swedish companies and Swedish consumers should have the freedom to decide whether or not they buy their products from Israel. I understand that we are far apart, you and I.
(THIRD DEPUTY SPEAKER: I remind you of the rules of conduct in the chamber. All speakers shall speak through the Speaker, but I have heard some different variants during the debate.)
Lorena Delgado Varas (V)
Madam Speaker! I would like to begin by addressing the Moderaternas approach to freedom. The Moderaternas stood behind South Africa's apartheid system at one time. The Moderaternas stood behind Chile's dictatorship at one time. And the Moderaternas stand behind Israel's genocide in the present. If we are to discuss freedom, we must therefore discuss whose freedom it concerns and what it should look like. We cannot make distinctions between people. We cannot make distinctions, as you have done. We must be consistent.
I thought I would take the opportunity to tell about a girl from Gaza named Hind Rajab. She was five years old when she fled with her family on January 29 last year because Israel had ordered them to leave the area – otherwise, they would be bombed. During the journey, they were attacked by Israeli occupation forces. Hind and her cousin Layan survived. The cousin called the emergency center to get help, but she was murdered during the call. After that, five-year-old Hind took over the call. Hind managed to speak with the emergency center and her mother for three hours. Then the call was cut. The ambulance received permission from Israel's army to go and pick her up – but what happened? Yes, Israel's army waited for the ambulance, bombed it, and then murdered Hind.
I think it is worth remembering who has been affected by Israel's genocide. It is thousands of children who Hind has been affected. Hind was murdered with over 300 shots.
Statsrådet Benjamin Dousa (M)
Madam Speaker! It is very pleasing that we finally have a long-awaited ceasefire in place, so that fewer children in Gaza will have to lose their parents or, in the worst case, their own lives. This government has been clear that we want to see a de-escalation of the situation and reduced violence. At the same time, the government has also been clear that Israel has the right to defend itself and that it was Hamas that committed brutal terror attacks against civilians in Israel. I very rarely hear the Left Party talk about that. There are even members of the Left Party who think that Israel does not have the right to exist.
The most important thing is to encourage continued ceasefire and that the Swedish support reaches its destination. Furthermore, the Swedish support has been expanded radically in kronor and öre so that it can go towards more food packages, vaccine syringes, cot beds, and protection.
In the long term, the Swedish government definitely stands behind a two-state solution but also behind helping with the long-term development work to rebuild Gaza. It cannot just be about food, vaccine injections, and hospital beds. Gaza must be rebuilt in the long term. Therefore, we hope that the upcoming steps of the ceasefire are also observed by all parties.
Source: The Swedish Parliament. The speeches come from the open data of the Riksdag, translated into English by AI, which may contain errors.