Response to interpellation 2024/25:626 on semiconductors and their current risks and vulnerabilities
Translated from Swedish by AI; the translation may contain errors. The Swedish text is the original.
Summary AI, written in advance
M considers that access to and protection of strategic technology such as semiconductors is crucial for Sweden's national security and credibility 1. M argues that Sweden is well-positioned and that the government has taken powerful measures for economic security 1 2 3. M emphasizes that events in the Indo-Pacific region affect security developments and that an armed attack on Taiwan would have far-reaching consequences for the need for semiconductors 4. S argues that China's totalitarian rule constitutes a threat and that knowledge transfer to China is a concern 5 6. S wants Sweden and the EU to ramp up the development of semiconductor components 7.
Written by AI in advance and may contain errors. The numbers lead to the speech a statement builds on; check against the text below.
Försvarsministern Pål Jonson (M)
Madam Speaker! Markus Selin has asked me if I intend to take any initiatives in light of what has been presented regarding an expansion of a semiconductor company's operations in Järfälla municipality and, if so, when it will take place. Markus Selin has also asked if I intend to take more initiatives to secure Sweden's integrity as well as access, knowledge, and manufacturing capacity when it comes to semiconductors.
The Government takes the security policy situation seriously and has in recent years taken powerful measures to strengthen the protection of Sweden's security, for example through the introduction of the Act (2023:560) on the screening of foreign direct investments mentioned in the interpellation. The Act does not, however, apply retroactively but is only applied to investments carried out after it entered into force.
I note that access to and protection of strategic technology, such as semiconductors, is crucial both for Sweden's national security and for Sweden's credibility as a partner in the defense area. Unwanted technology proliferation also has consequences for Swedish companies' access to technology, their market access, and ultimately our ability to supply the Armed Forces with materiel.
In accordance with the national security strategy, a national strategic framework for economic security is now being developed in order to ensure the availability of and protection for groundbreaking technology as well as to manage strategic dependencies. The Government has already, in addition to the assignment to the Defence Materiel Administration mentioned in the interpellation, taken several initiatives for further measures. Through the bill Research and innovation for the future, curiosity and utility (prop. 2024/25:60), a major investment is being made, among other things, in groundbreaking and strategic technologies. Semiconductors are mentioned in the bill as an example of this. It is important to ensure proportional protection of certain research activities, as they can constitute a strategic resource when it comes to Sweden's economic prosperity and growth.
Regarding the expansion of a semiconductor company's operations in Järfälla that the interpellor mentioned, is it correct that the municipality has approached the government with a petition? This is being prepared within the Government Offices. Otherwise, I cannot comment on the individual case.
Sweden's collective ability to secure access to, knowledge of, and manufacturing capacity regarding semiconductors needs to continue to be developed. The Government and the Government Offices are working continuously on these issues.
Markus Selin (S)
Madam Speaker! I thank the Minister for Defence for a comprehensive account.
I initially intended to take the liberty of making a so-called "approach" regarding what we are actually talking about here in the Riksdag today. Semiconductors and semiconductor components are completely vital in modern electronics development. We are talking about transistors, diodes, integrated circuits, and other components. These are components that can be used for, for example, modern mobile phones and rather harmless and fun effects such as the graphics moving along when I turn and rotate my phone. With a little imagination and smart engineers, which both Sweden and other countries have, one can however also use these semiconductor components for modern weapons. It is fundamentally this that we are talking about here, Madam Speaker.
I will touch upon China as a country. I will also touch upon the factory in Järfälla municipality which is located 16 kilometers from here. The defense minister and I could get there with a brisk walk during a long lunch; that is how close this issue is to me and my constituency.
Madam President! I have laughed with Chinese people. I have worked with Chinese people. I have eaten meals with Chinese people. Yes – I have been in China and worked. The current regime is an authoritarian regime in a one-party state. When I saw pictures of how Xi Jinping stood with Vladimir Putin on the stand on Friday and waved, it struck me once again that it is a gang of bandits and despots we are dealing with.
It is not actually the people in China that I am after. I am after the leadership and the government there, who want to turn all Chinese people into agents and as many companies as possible into contributors to the militarization of this totalitarian state.
I understand that the Minister for Defence cannot comment on current matters such as this petition from Järfälla Municipality, which is, moreover, governed by Moderater and Socialdemokrater. However, the fact that it concerns a totalitarian one-party state and its connection to cutting-edge electronics development just a stone's throw from here makes this issue very pressing. It is therefore not an individual case we have to deal with, Madam President, but it is about broader principles on a general level.
China has gone in the wrong direction. Russia has been heading in the completely wrong direction for a very long time. I would very much like to hear the Minister for Defence say something more about a conceivable palette regarding how we could act, without speaking exactly about this motion.
I could start by urging the Minister for Defence to update certain strategies. Here in the Riksdag, we made a decision regarding a China letter. It is from 2019 and is now starting to get many years on its back. In connection with this, the Social Democrats in government developed a competence center regarding China. There is more that a government could do. One could support, contribute with dialogue, and help companies and municipalities in this issue.
Försvarsministern Pål Jonson (M)
Madam President! I thank Markus Selin for the question.
I completely agree with Markus Selin on how central semiconductors are for the production of different types of platforms and systems, not least within the defense area. I will return to this later during the interpellation debate.
Let me also take the discussion regarding China and the dependencies that exist. Markus Selin knows that both Must, FRA and the Security Service in their annual reports have pointed out that it is primarily three countries that conduct intelligence gathering against Sweden and that can threaten Sweden's economic, political or military security. It is primarily about Russia, but it is also about China and Iran.
I can only state that China's totalitarian development, geopolitical ambitions, and pursuit to reshape the rules-based world order represent a threat to Sweden's national security. We will, of course, still maintain a dialogue and trade with China and cooperate in areas where it is appropriate and compatible with our national security. Such matters require careful consideration.
The most central of the measures that have been taken in this area is the legislation on the screening of foreign direct investments. It is relatively new; it is a year old. This legislation applies relatively broadly and targets both new investments and new establishments of security-sensitive activities.
All EU countries need to have such legislation in place, and one must also have what is called a point of contact towards the EU system. In an international comparison, our legislation is relatively ambitious in that respect. That is good, because we naturally have a great deal of protection-worthy activity in Sweden. We have extensive research and development, advanced production, and outstanding companies. There are, therefore, reasons for us to handle this with a great depth of intention. It is the Inspectorate for Strategic Products, ISP, that carries out these reviews. The legislation has been in force for a year, and so far 1,600 notifications have been submitted to ISP.
Most recently this autumn, we reinforced this activity by allocating new funds of 4 million to FOI. FOI has good competence when it comes to various cutting-edge technologies, and they also have good insights regarding geo-economic and geopolitical changes and the protection of the rules-based world order. FOI has been given a special responsibility for some important areas. It is about keeping up with technological development, which is difficult to regulate because it moves so fast, and looking at security of supply and innovation within the area of groundbreaking technologies.
With all this said: How do we stand in an international comparison? Sweden has sprinted. In the early 90s we had this kind of legislation, but then it was removed. Now we have had new legislation put in place, and it should be seen in combination with the fact that since 2018 we have had a new security protection act, which the Chamber decided on in broad political agreement, and a new security regulation. We are also reviewing products with dual-use. Tightening is occurring on the product list, and a new list will arrive on 1 October this year. Thus, a number of measures are being taken to protect security-sensitive and society-critical activities in this area.
Markus Selin (S)
Madam Speaker! The Minister for Defence raises many wise aspects, and I agree with much of it. Even the Minister for Defence's opening statement contained an important aspect: that unwanted technology proliferation has consequences for Swedish companies. It is not just about the security policy aspect, but let me emphasize that I agree. The Minister for Defence also raised ISP and careful considerations.
Let me emphasize a few things.
First and foremost: Sweden is an export-dependent, open economy, and I agree with the Minister of Defence that we must safeguard free and open trade, free business activity and the like. But as the listeners have understood, we have touched, yes, perhaps crossed a line when it comes to the security of the realm and the security of united democracies.
There is a simple remedy, namely high-tech development and production in Sweden. This is what I intend to stand up for and safeguard. I want to promote the engineering profession so that more women and men choose it, because one way to eventually remedy these problems is for us to have a strong and reliable own development in this area.
I return to the specific case in my constituency, Järfälla municipality. As the Minister for Defence has highlighted, Sweden has had legislation since 2023, but it does not cover activities prior to that. As it stands, the current, and already large, factory will double its operations, and I am concerned about the transfer of knowledge. I assume that the knowledge present in the Järfälla factory ends up in totalitarian China. I have taken note of the skilled engineers' hundreds of patents, and it concerns intellectual property and very sharp, smart ideas. But I assume, as I said, that these ideas and this wisdom unfortunately end up in modern weapons production in totalitarian China.
We Social Democrats are ready to support. We know that legislation must be reviewed continuously and revised. It was the Social Democrats who, in a government position, launched the first investigations into similar legislation and submitted the referrals to the Council on Legislation that subsequently became legislation on December 1, 2023, and that is important.
We can fantasize about more direct measures: purchase, acquisition or, which perhaps sounds brutal, expropriation. Shareholdings, golden share, are also an opportunity to gain insight into the knowledge transfer.
Försvarsministern Pål Jonson (M)
Madam Speaker! I will not pick up easy points on the important issue of semiconductors, but let me remind Markus Selin that the previous government's work prior to the introduction of the review legislation was based on an announcement from the joint Committee on Foreign Affairs and Defence, on which I sat. The opposition also tried to do its part, therefore. Much of the legislation also emanates from EU legislation, and there is strong EU cooperation in this area.
I think more young people should make the career choice Markus Selin made and educate themselves to become engineers. I am a political scientist myself, but when it comes to research, innovation, and economic growth, more young people need to choose the engineering profession. The government has therefore presented a STEM strategy to encourage more people to engage in the technical and natural science fields, as it is also an important source of economic prosperity.
How can we then avoid unhealthy dependencies on technology from other countries? It is about promoting the development Sweden has within technology and innovation. As Markus Selin knows, Sweden is very prominent in the field of innovation; we are usually ranked in the top three in the world and number one in the EU. Here we also work diligently with semiconductors, and semiconductors are also one of the technologies that the EU has identified as extra important and urgent.
Vinnova, which has a central function in driving the work on innovation, has reviewed how Sweden stands in the semiconductor field, and we actually stand quite well. There are various checkered and striped reasons for that. We have, among other things, experience of a system with integration of semiconductors because we have product companies that are prominent, for example Ericsson, Saab and Scania. We also have a broad and strong research base in this area, and we are successful in some niches. We stand well, for example, when it comes to high-frequency electronics. Vinnova also leads strategic innovation programs in the semiconductor field, and we are now establishing a center formation in the semiconductor field. We do all this to consolidate the activities taking place in Sweden in a very important area, also for future competitiveness. These are assets we have. I therefore dare to assert that a great deal is happening to strengthen our security of supply.
Madam President! The second dimension I want to highlight when it comes to protecting operations in Sweden is the national security strategy. In the third chapter, the concept of economic security is addressed. The previous strategy from 2017 pointed out various generic threat images, but the current one also sheds light on economic security and that there is a strong correlation between technological development and being able to protect the same to secure Sweden's economic prosperity and competitiveness, which is well worth considering. We are also developing a new framework, where we work broadly to actively avoid technology leakage and to strengthen Sweden's economic prosperity and competitiveness also in the long term.
Markus Selin (S)
Madam Speaker! Thank you, Minister for Defence, for a comprehensive reply! I agree in large part and thank you for it.
In conclusion, I want to touch upon one final dimension in all of this. I want to emphasize the importance of us in Sweden, and also in the EU, seriously ramping up the development of semiconductor components. As it stands now, Madam Speaker, it is Taiwan that accounts for 90 percent of all development and production of the most advanced semiconductor components, which can admittedly be used for modern toys and mobile phones, but which can also be used for weapons.
I also want to touch upon the potential conflict between Taiwan and its neighbor to the west, China. I assert that not only Asia but the entire world economy will face major problems in the event of an escalating conflict there. As the Defense Minister said, Sweden is on the ball, which is good, and the EU is on the ball, which is good.
In conclusion, I would like to know what the Minister for Defence has to say regarding the assignment to Försvarets materielverk, which the Minister for Defence launched in December and which was to be delivered on May 1, concerning vulnerabilities linked to specifically semiconductor components.
Then I just want to emphasize that Järfälla, the leadership in Järfälla, and also I wish that the Minister for Defence and the government act quickly in the matter of the petition to the government regarding the situation with the semiconductor factory that we have in Järfälla municipality.
Försvarsministern Pål Jonson (M)
Madam Speaker! Thank you, Markus Selin, for an important interpellation debate! I appreciate the constructive atmosphere of conversation we have.
I shall mention a few things. Regarding the semiconductor company that is world-leading and located in Taiwan, there is the connection that we have repeatedly seen that security developments in the Euro-Atlantic area are affected by events in the Indo-Pacific area. We have developed a special strategy for defense policy aspects of the development in the Indo-Pacific region, which I have visited repeatedly. Not least, it concerns trade and technological development. It would naturally have far-reaching consequences for the need for semiconductors in the event that Taiwan is subjected to an armed attack.
The second question concerned the assignment to FMV that we launched and which has also been reported to the Ministry of Defence. It is unfortunately surrounded by secrecy. There are reasons for that, but I can at least say a few things that it concerns. I can, of course, return to the Committee on Defence in a different setting if there is interest.
There are some things that emphasis is placed on in the assignment. Some of it comes from the EU, that we are requested to do this. One looks at resilience and robustness in supply chains; the assignment touches on thinking through the supply chains carefully in this area. It also touches on physical security and cybersecurity and what vulnerabilities one has there. It applies to everything from the need for perimeter protection and shell protection to cybersecurity for critical infrastructure. It also touches on technology security and technology leakage and also the economic dependencies or different types of extortion situations that one can end up in.
There are, therefore, a number of aspects that are raised in the assignment that FMV has now reported to the Ministry of Defence. I can gladly return to the Defence Committee, but in that case, I should do so under secrecy, Madam Speaker.
Again: A warm thank you 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.