Response to interpellation 2025/26:128 on Swedish support for UNRWA
Translated from Swedish by AI; the translation may contain errors. The Swedish text is the original.
Summary AI, written in advance
The debate concerns the Swedish support for UNRWA. M argues that the government channels support through other actors due to uncertainties regarding UNRWA's operations 1 2. M claims that these organizations reach the population 2, that there are links between UNRWA and extremism 2, and that support to organizations such as Unicef is more effective 3. M emphasizes that the government makes tough assessments to use the tax money effectively 4 and that Sweden is one of the world's largest donors 3. MP argues that UNRWA is indispensable 5, that its capacity cannot be replaced 5 6 and that Sweden is the only country in Europe that has withdrawn its support 7. MP argues that the government is not following the EU's decision 6 and that the sudden stop of support affects schools and clinics 8. V claims that UNRWA is the hub for the aid 9, that independent researchers have not found links to Hamas 9 and that it is the organization that can best save lives 9.
Written by AI in advance and may contain errors. The numbers lead to the speech a statement builds on; check against the text below.
Bistånds- och utrikeshandelsministern Benjamin Dousa (M)
Madam Speaker! Jacob Risberg has asked me how I view the ICJ's finding that Israel is obliged to allow UNRWA's activities in Gaza and what assessment I make of the European Parliament's decision to increase support for UNRWA and the EU's stated support for its central role in the region. Jacob Risberg has also asked me if I am prepared to resume the Swedish aid to UNRWA in light of the ICJ's advisory opinion and the EU's position on the issue.
It is welcome and entirely necessary that during the first phase of the peace plan certain improvements in humanitarian access have occurred. However, obstacles still remain for the aid that is needed to reach its destination, and even though the volumes have increased, they are judged to continue being insufficient to meet the very extensive needs. It is of utmost importance that the import of humanitarian emergency aid continues to increase and that more border crossings are opened.
The government has, since the beginning of the war, pushed the issue of unimpeded humanitarian access to Gaza. We have conveyed these clear demands in Sweden's own contacts with the Israeli government and together with other EU countries. We also participate actively in the extensive work that is ongoing in the EU and in the UN.
In December last year, Sweden voted for a General Assembly resolution requesting an advisory opinion from the International Court of Justice, i.e., the ICJ. Sweden supports the ICJ, the UN's principal judicial organ, and respects the court's independence and its role according to the UN Charter.
In its advisory opinion, the Court notes, among other things, that the civilian population in Gaza has been insufficiently supplied and that Israel, as the occupying power, has an obligation to accept and facilitate relief efforts, including from UNRWA, to meet the needs of the civilian population. Israel must also not obstruct such efforts. The Court also notes that Israel has an obligation to cooperate with the UN, including UNRWA.
The government has been clear in its criticism of the laws regarding UNRWA that entered into force in January in Israel and has reminded of Israel's responsibility under international humanitarian law to ensure that the needs of the civilian population are met in Gaza. In our own contacts, together with other Nordic countries and as part of the EU, we have urged Israel to ensure continued humanitarian access for UNRWA and other UN organizations.
In view of the overall picture and the uncertainties characterizing UNRWA's operations, the government has chosen to channel the significantly increased support to the region through other actors. The government has clearly demonstrated its strong commitment to continued humanitarian support to Gaza's hard-hit civilian population. Since the beginning of the war, Sweden has contributed over one and a half billion Swedish kronor to meet the acute needs.
Sweden has a close dialogue with other EU countries and like-minded countries regarding the developments on the ground, and we continue to act for unified, clear EU messages. It is important to cooperate with other donors to strengthen the collective response to Gaza, but it is up to each individual donor to choose how the support is best designed.
It is now of the utmost importance that the rest of the world maintains the pressure for a full implementation of the agreement, and that steps are taken with the aim of reaching a lasting end to the war and to pave the way for a two-state solution.
Jacob Risberg (MP)
Madam Speaker! I thank Benjamin Dousa for being here today and answering the questions we have regarding the support to UNRWA.
The humanitarian situation in Gaza is, despite the fragile ceasefire, extremely critical. The UN agency UNRWA remains the most important actor in meeting the basic needs of the civilian population – not only in Gaza but also among the Palestinian refugees throughout the region. Despite this, Sweden's government has chosen to stop the Swedish support to UNRWA, which severely complicates the possibility of delivering life-saving aid.
On 22 October 2025, the International Court of Justice in The Hague, ICJ, presented an advisory opinion on Israel's obligations in relation to the UN's presence in the occupied Palestinian territories. The Court finds that Israel is legally obligated under international law to facilitate and not obstruct the humanitarian work of the UN and UNRWA. In the opinion, the Court also emphasizes that UNRWA has an indispensable role in meeting the humanitarian needs in Gaza and that its capacity cannot be replaced in the current situation.
The court also emphasizes that allegations of infiltration from Hamas and a lack of neutrality within UNRWA remain unconfirmed. There is simply nothing that confirms this. The court also states that restrictions on UNRWA's activities must be lifted immediately and that Israel cannot unilaterally decide to deny UN agencies access to occupied areas.
The European Union has recently chosen to increase its support to UNRWA. The European Parliament has decided to increase the appropriations to the UN agency in the EU's budget for 2026, with reference to UNRWA's vital role in delivering humanitarian aid and basic services such as healthcare and education in both Gaza and the region. The EU's member states have, in a joint statement, emphasized that guaranteed humanitarian access to Gaza with a central responsibility for UNRWA is a common priority for the EU.
Both Minister for Development Cooperation Dousa and the Minister for Foreign Affairs often emphasize the importance of respecting international courts and that Swedish foreign policy follows the EU.
The answer to the questions I have asked Dousa absolutely highlights all of UNRWA's advantages and all the good that UNRWA does. Reference is made to the overall picture, and the overall picture is very positive. UNRWA is perhaps the most scrutinized of all the UN's organs, and the ICJ establishes that there are no proven links between UNRWA and Hamas.
When Dousa in the same answer says "looked at the overall picture and the uncertainties that characterize UNRWA's activities," I wonder which uncertainties are being referred to. Even Swedish investigations have examined this and seen that there are no uncertainties regarding UNRWA's activities. I still wonder what uncertainties are being pointed out.
The government refers to a significantly increased support that it wants to channel to the region through other actors. I wonder which other actors those are. In addition to Gaza, UNRWA has extensive operations in the West Bank, Jordan, Syria, and Lebanon, where they run refugee camps. Has the government intended to increase support to UNHCR, that is, the UN's refugee agency? It will not help, because UNHCR does not have the mandate to help the Palestinian refugees. It is UNRWA's responsibility to do so.
I therefore wonder: How does the government intend to continue supporting UNRWA, and what are the uncertainties that the Minister of State believes exist and characterize UNRWA's operations?
Lotta Johnsson Fornarve (V)
Madam Speaker! I thank the Minister for the answer to the interpellation. I also thank Jacob Risberg again for an important interpellation.
The situation in Gaza is beyond catastrophic, and the needs for aid are naturally enormous. Food, medicine, healthcare, water, housing – and so on, and so forth, are needed. The situation on the West Bank is also difficult.
UNRWA has existed since 1949 and has the UN mandate to protect and support Palestinian refugees. It concerns several million Palestinian refugees, and their relatives, who have been displaced from their homes since Israel was formed.
There is no other organization that can do what UNRWA, with its 12,000 people on the ground in Gaza, does. It is UNRWA that has the UN mandate to look after the interests of the Palestinian refugees and provide them with services on a broad front, such as healthcare, education, tents, clean water and sanitation. There is no other organization that comes close to being able to do this work. The population also has a great trust in UNRWA. They trust UNRWA's staff and know them well because they have been on the ground for decades.
UNRWA, as has been said, does not only exist in Gaza but also provides humanitarian aid, education, and health services in the West Bank and in the Palestinian refugee camps in the region, such as in Jordan and Lebanon. It is a matter of UNRWA having the overall responsibility for the Palestinian refugees. We must also not forget the stabilizing role that UNRWA plays in the region. It must not be underestimated.
There is no other organization that can take over and do what UNRWA does, except for a Palestinian state. UNRWA is completely indispensable.
Sweden is actually the only country in Europe that has withdrawn its support for UNRWA. What is the decision to withdraw support for UNRWA based on? It is difficult to understand. Obviously, one is not listening to established researchers and independent investigations. Is it the case that Sweden's government would rather listen to Israel's smear campaign than to serious researchers? It is, after all, obvious that Israel is trying to get rid of the Palestinian refugee problem by discrediting UNRWA. This must, naturally, be prevented with all force and rejected.
Sweden should instead listen to the International Court of Justice, which states that the restrictions on UNRWA's activities must be lifted immediately and that Israel cannot unilaterally decide to deny the UN agency access to the occupied territories. Why is the government not following the EU's decision, which states that UNRWA has a vital role in both Gaza and the region and is a common priority for the EU?
Does the government intend to follow the International Court of Justice's and the EU's decision and resume support to UNRWA?
Bistånds- och utrikeshandelsministern Benjamin Dousa (M)
Madam Speaker! Sweden and the government are Europe's second-largest donor to the humanitarian response in Gaza. Our support has been channeled through organizations such as Unicef, World Food Programme and UNFPA, that is to say three different UN organizations, and additionally ICRC, namely the International Committee of the Red Cross.
These are four organizations that carry out very important work in Gaza. They have logistics on site inside Gaza and also manage to get trucks into Gaza. What use is our support if the support cannot get into Gaza and all the way to the much-needed civilian population in Gaza? I actually do not understand how it can be more important to support a single UN organization instead of supporting other UN organizations that actually get trucks in and reach the population.
I was asked which uncertainties still remain. Yes, among other things, we do not know what role UNRWA will have this year, next year, and in the coming years. One hears clear rumors and signals from the UN system that the agency will need to be restructured because the legislation from Israel will remain as it is. This is something the Swedish government has been very clear in its criticism of, and we continue to criticize it, but we must make our decisions based on how the situation actually looks right now.
We also know that the claim that there should not have been any links between UNRWA and Hamas – or other terrorist organizations and those types of groupings – and that there should not have occurred antisemitic expressions and extremist views, is not true. UNRWA has received criticism for lack of neutrality for decades. It has concerned everything from antisemitic content in textbooks to the leader of UNRWA's staff union receiving a leading position in Hamas. This continues, and it has existed for very many years.
We have therefore channeled the support to other organizations that we know, on one hand, do not have connections to extremism, antisemitism or, in the worst case, terrorism, and on the other hand, actually get trucks in and reach the deeply in need population.
Jacob Risberg (MP)
Madam Speaker! I thank the Minister for the answer.
One must look at what the International Court of Justice says in its opinion. It states that the restrictions on UNRWA's activities must be lifted immediately. The withdrawn support for the UN agency UNRWA is such a restriction. UNRWA has lost a third of its funding over the last two years – in the middle of the war – because Sweden and the USA withdrew their support. 90 percent of UNRWA's facilities have been completely or partially destroyed, and more than 360 of the agency's 12,000 employees have died during the bombings.
UNRWA is still the largest primary healthcare provider in Gaza. Over 1,000 members of UNRWA's healthcare staff run various types of clinics. They meet 13,000 Gazans every day. Since January this year, UNRWA has delivered 675 million liters of drinking water and household water, reaching 1.4 million displaced people. UNRWA has provided education services in Gaza in the midst of a burning war and reached over 290,000 children through its distance learning initiative. Since the war began, UNRWA has also provided 520,000 children with psychosocial support to help them cope with trauma.
All of this only applies to Gaza. We are also aware of all the work taking place in the West Bank, in Lebanon, in Syria and in Jordan – work that the Minister for Foreign Affairs almost never mentions when he speaks about UNRWA. He constantly returns to Gaza. I would like to know how one is to help the Palestinian refugees in other areas when one has withdrawn the support to UNRWA, but when I ask that question, the Minister for Foreign Affairs constantly refers back to the humanitarian situation in Gaza.
Then it is a bit strange, because in the EU's budget resolution for next year it is established that one must "increase the funding to UNRWA in view of its important role in providing humanitarian aid and basic services such as health care and education to Palestinian refugees in Gaza and the region at large, support the reconstruction in Gaza and strengthen the humanitarian and economic aid in Syria with support programs for reconstruction of infrastructure, mechanisms for accountability, strengthening of civil society space and social stability in the country as well as support to ethnic and religious minorities in the Middle East".
The government often speaks of how Sweden's foreign policy should be in line with the EU's foreign policy. But how united is the foreign policy when the EU decides to increase support to UNRWA and Sweden decides to withdraw its support?
The Minister also says that he does not understand why it is so important to support a single UN agency. But we can go back to what the International Court of Justice says, namely that there is no organization that can replace UNRWA today. There are many who can complement UNRWA when it comes to the work that needs to be done in Gaza, but there is still no organization that can replace UNRWA. All the initiatives and organizations that the Minister mentioned are dependent on UNRWA's infrastructure inside Gaza. Without this infrastructure, they would not manage at all.
Dousa referred to a lack of neutrality, but every time something such has been discovered, UNRWA has been careful to rectify it. I wonder what it is that people think there are question marks around when it comes to UNRWA's neutrality.
Lotta Johnsson Fornarve (V)
Madam Speaker! I thank the Minister for further answers.
The Minister does not seem to have understood UNRWA's unique role. UNRWA is the very hub for aid operations and aid work in Gaza and in the entire region when it comes to the Palestinian refugees and is, without comparison, the organization that has the most staff on the ground. UNRWA as an organization has no connection to Hamas; independent researchers – including people from our own agency Sida and from the independent Raoul Wallenberg Institute – have come to this conclusion on several different occasions. That is how it is.
UNRWA is the organization that has the best possibility to reach the severely affected Palestinian people. Listen to your own expert agency Sida, which says that there is no other humanitarian actor that has the possibility to save lives and alleviate distress to the extent that UNRWA does! Listen to the International Court of Justice, which establishes that restrictions on UNRWA's activities must be lifted immediately and that Israel cannot unilaterally decide to deny the UN agency access to the occupied territories! Listen to the EU, which says that UNRWA has a vital role in both Gaza and the region and is a common priority for the EU!
UNRWA is the Palestinian people's security in the entire region. UNRWA cannot be replaced by anything other than a future Palestinian state institution. No other organization can fill that vacuum. This is established by the International Court of Justice. This is not just any organization, but UNRWA has the UN's mandate.
Use our Swedish aid wisely and effectively! Give support to the organization that is the very hub of aid work in Gaza and in the region and which is on the ground with 12,000 employees! Think about it, and do it quickly! Resume the support to UNRWA!
Bistånds- och utrikeshandelsministern Benjamin Dousa (M)
Madam Speaker! Both Member of Parliament Risberg and Member of Parliament Fornarve have encouraged the government and me to listen to the international judges. The government has, as I have said several times in this debate and in previous interpellation debates, been very sharp in its criticism of the laws regarding UNRWA that came into force in Israel at the beginning of the year. We have reminded of Israel's special responsibility, according to international humanitarian law, to ensure that the needs of the civilian population are met in Gaza. UNRWA must, in line with other UN organizations, be protected and respected in accordance with international obligations. The government has been very clear about this, and I have personally taken it up with official Israeli representatives.
Member of Parliament Risberg asked if we should not be in complete agreement with the European Union. I think it is interesting that precisely that argument is put forward in this debate, given that Sweden's policy in many issues concerning Middle East policy has been much tougher than the EU-common policy. Sanctions against violent settlers and extreme Israeli ministers are not something that the EU is pushing for with the official EU policy, but it is definitely something that the Swedish government is pushing for. That we are to stay within the framework of the EU cooperation and try to find similarities there does not mean that we should slavishly follow exactly everything that decisions are made on in Brussels.
Both Members of Parliament used the argument that Unicef, World Food Programme, UNFPA, ICRC and others would be completely dependent on UNRWA's logistics. I encourage the members to speak with Unicef, World Food Programme, UNFPA with several. As recently as just a few weeks ago, I met with Unicef's management, who told me how important their work in Gaza is right now. Do the Members of Parliament from Vänsterpartiet and Miljöpartiet think we should cut back on Unicef's important work in Gaza? Should we cut back on World Food Programme? Which tens of thousands of children, women and other people in Gaza will now not receive food parcels because Miljöpartiet and Vänsterpartiet instead want to give funds to an organization that is not allowed to get any trucks in at all?
When it comes to what our support for the rest of the region looks like, I encourage Risberg to take out a map and point to any country in the Middle East. We can take Syria, Lebanon, Jordan, or actually any country at all – I can promise that Sweden is one of the largest donors in the entire world to the humanitarian work and, often, the long-term development cooperation in the region.
The Swedish government and the Swedish people are taking their responsibility. We are, as said, Europe's second-largest donor to the humanitarian response in Gaza. Now more countries in Europe and in the world need to take their responsibility for the civilian population.
Jacob Risberg (MP)
Madam Speaker! It is not always easy to understand how the Swedish government views UNRWA. Sometimes Israel is criticized for obstructing UNRWA, and in the EU it is said that the contribution to UNRWA should be increased. Here in Sweden it is said that the contribution should be reduced because there are uncertainties regarding UNRWA's activities. What is it that is important? Is it to increase the contribution and see UNRWA as something positive, or is it the uncertainty surrounding the whole thing? I do not quite understand that. Why does one continue to criticize Israel for the laws against UNRWA if it is the case that there are uncertainties and if one does not think that UNRWA is a good organization?
Then there is this matter regarding the other areas. It was very good that Minister Dousa mentioned the other areas. He also mentioned the increased humanitarian aid that is being given to Lebanon, Syria, and Jordan, but how will this benefit the Palestinian refugees? How will UNRWA be able to run schools in these countries and in the West Bank? How will they be able to continue to run their clinics and so on?
Unicef, World Food Programme and other organizations are very important for Gaza, but they are – again – dependent on UNRWA's logistics. For those listening to understand how large Sweden's support to UNRWA has been, I can say that it concerns three months' wages for UNRWA staff. It is this support that we have withdrawn. I can understand if someone is critical and wants to reduce the support, but in that case, it should be done year by year. Then one has an opportunity to replace it.
They cut off the support abruptly. Three months' wages disappear for those who maintain the logistics and for those who run schools in Västbanken, in Lebanon, in Jordan, and in Syria. Poof – gone!
Bistånds- och utrikeshandelsministern Benjamin Dousa (M)
Madam Speaker! I think we are very careful and clear about why we principally defend UNRWA's right to operate in Gaza and principally criticize Israel's government, regardless of what we think about the quality of the organization's operations. In the same way, both the Swedish government and, I hope, the Miljöpartiet principally stand up for freedom of expression, even if the parties do not agree with each other on the merits. That is why we stand here in the chamber of the Riksdag and debate.
It is the principle that makes us criticize Israel and that we, quite regardless of what we think about the organization's quality and direction, stand up for UNRWA's right to operate unhindered in Gaza. Then we have views on UNRWA's activities, especially in relation to the other organizations.
That is exactly what it is like to be the Minister for Development Cooperation – the world's needs are almost infinite, but the Swedish development budget is finite. Therefore, we must make tough assessments every day. It is about where we believe the tax money can be used most effectively so that we help as many people as possible.
Our assessment is that support to Unicef, World Food Programme, UNFPA, ICRC and others is what is currently best suited to get as much support as possible into Gaza. If one looks at the region as a whole, one sees that we support precisely the type of activities that Member Risberg mentioned – for example schools and health centers – in Syria, Lebanon and several other countries in the Middle East.
Source: The Swedish Parliament. The speeches come from the open data of the Riksdag, translated into English by AI, which may contain errors.