Response to interpellation 2025/26:260 on Sweden's engagement in the OSCE
Translated from Swedish by AI; the translation may contain errors. The Swedish text is the original.
Summary AI, written in advance
1 M considers OSCE to be a unique organization and an integrated part of Sweden's security policy 1. 1 M argues that Sweden is an active participating state that defends the organization's values 1. 2 M argues that the Foreign Minister has other priorities than S 2. 3 S considers that Sweden must lead and take initiative in the European security architecture 3. 3 S argues that the government exhibits an international withdrawal 3. 4 S argues that Sweden should push to activate the Moscow Mechanism against violations of human rights 4. 5 S argues that Sweden should be a humanitarian superpower 5. 6 S emphasizes the importance of engagement in the UN and OSCE 6. 6 7 S pushes for the Moscow Mechanism to be used in crimes against the rights of hbtqi persons 6 7. 8 9 S argues that the government should be clearer in its actions against norm shifts 8 9. 10 M argues that compliance with human rights is a security issue 10. 10 M argues that Sweden has been driving to activate the Moscow Mechanism in Georgia and support Ukraine 10. 11 M argues that OSCE is a unique forum to document abuses and hold Russia accountable 11.
Written by AI in advance and may contain errors. The numbers lead to the speech a statement builds on; check against the text below.
Utrikesministern Maria Malmer Stenergard (M)
Madam Speaker! Johan Büser has asked me if I have taken the initiative for an analysis of OSCE's importance today for European security, democracy and human rights and if I can, in that case, report on the results. Furthermore, Johan Büser has asked me if I intend to change Sweden's future engagement within OSCE.
OSSE is a unique organization with a broad concept of security that includes, among other things, military security, democracy and human rights. Sovereignty, territorial integrity and respect for human rights, as emphasized in the Helsinki Final Act and the Charter of Paris, constitute the basis for the European security order.
OSCE is an integrated part of our security policy and an instrument to safeguard our interests. OSCE is an important complement to Nato and the EU as an arena for accountability and cooperation, with its own tools to examine how states live up to their commitments. It is also an important forum for interacting with the countries outside Nato and the EU that seek alternatives to Russia, through cooperation in Vienna but also through the organization's field presence. This makes the organization unique and valuable.
The Government Offices, in cooperation with our foreign agencies, are making ongoing assessments of OSCE's role in today's security policy situation. This work is an integrated part of the government's management of Sweden's OSCE work.
In a time when Russian actions are becoming increasingly aggressive, the OSCE plays an important role. The organization constitutes today a meeting place where two of Sweden's most important foreign policy priorities are driven: the policy of deterrence against Russia and the support for Ukraine's sovereignty and territorial integrity.
The government was represented at a high level at the OSCE Council for Science and Technology meeting in December, participated actively in the preparations, and is engaged in the follow-up. Attendance at these meetings is important for setting the direction, but it is primarily the daily work that makes a difference. Sweden participates every week in the OSCE's decision-making bodies and consistently drives the line for compliance with commitments, respect for democratic principles, and a strong civil society. During 2025, Sweden led the OSCE's Committee on the Human Dimension on behalf of the then Finnish chairmanship.
Sweden is an active and constructive participating state with a commitment characterized by clarity, perseverance, and a consistent defense of OSCE's fundamental values. The Government continues to stand up for the organization's unique added value, based on our collective foreign and security policy priorities.
Johan Büser (S)
Madam Speaker! We live in a time of geopolitical upheaval. Last year, the OSCE turned 50, and the European security order that has been built up since the Helsinki Conference in 1975, and which rests on the principles of sovereignty, territorial integrity, and respect for human rights, is being fundamentally challenged.
Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine is the most brutal expression of this, but we also see how democracies are being weakened from within, how authoritarian forces are coordinating, how international law is being relativized, and how far-right parties are growing and, in several cases, cooperating with other classic right-wing parties around Europe. For example, the Moderaterna stood here in Sweden's Riksdag behind the election of the Sweden Democrats' Björn Söder to the position of chairperson of the Swedish OSCE delegation.
It is in that situation that we stand here today and discuss Sweden's role in the OSCE. The OSCE is not only a meeting place for conferences, but it is one of the institutions that upholds the European security architecture. It is there that security, democracy, and human rights are held together.
Madam Speaker! When I was an election observer in Georgia, I saw how power is used to manipulate elections, weaken the opposition, and silence civil society. Democracy there is not developing; it is in retreat. Sweden participated in and activated the Moscow Mechanism together with over 20 countries to investigate the situation in Georgia. It was important, and it was good. But it is not enough to react; Sweden must also lead.
In an article in Dagens Arena last year, the long-time OSCE activist Olof Kleberg asks: "Have the Moderates given up OSCE?" He writes that Sweden has previously been a driving force but that the commitment is now perceived as toned down, passive, and silent.
I think it is a serious issue that Kleberg puts his finger on, Madam Speaker, because while a diminishing commitment to OSCE seems to be the case for the government's part, we see a broader pattern than that in Swedish foreign policy. We see that embassies are being closed. We see that aid is decreasing sharply. We also see that high-level presence is decreasing in international contexts.
In the foreign policy debate a couple of weeks ago, Morgan Johansson noted that Sweden's Foreign Minister misses many meetings. This also applies to the most recent OSCE ministerial council meeting, which took place in Vienna a couple of months ago. Instead of listening to Sweden's Foreign Minister, I, who was on site, heard the cabinet secretary, while many other foreign ministers of OSCE member states were present. And a common question that many of us who work with foreign policy now encounter when we travel is: Where is Sweden?
The Minister for Foreign Affairs says in his response to my interpellation that OSCE is an integrated part of our security policy, that Sweden participates every week and that ongoing assessments are made. In a time when the world order is being shaken to its core, it is not enough to just participate. It requires initiative, it requires political drive and it requires that one establishes contacts with others, like-minded ones. It requires a will to shape the development.
I therefore want to ask the Minister for Foreign Affairs: How does the government's broader international withdrawal align with the ambition to be a leading force in the organization that is to defend the European security order – while at the same time the Minister for Foreign Affairs so clearly de-prioritizes the international meetings?
Linnéa Wickman (S)
Madam Speaker! I would like to extend a thanks to the Minister for Foreign Affairs, who is here and debating important issues with us today.
As the Minister emphasizes, OSCE is a unique organization based on a broad concept of security where military security, democracy, climate issues and human rights cannot be isolated from one another. It was a groundbreaking insight in Helsinki in 1975, and it is, if possible, even more relevant today when we look out over the world and its development.
The human dimension of OSCE's mandate is not a side issue, but it is the very core. In several member states, however, we unfortunately see how rights are being dismantled step by step. We see how legislation aimed at hbtqi persons is introduced or tightened and how these people become political targets. We see how women are denied the right to their own bodies and the power over their own lives. We see how religious and ethnic minorities are subjected to discrimination and hate speech, and we see how the space for civil society shrinks.
This is not a random development, but it is part of an authoritarian development where human rights are presented as threats to national identity or traditional values.
That is why it is not enough to say that Sweden is an active member state, but we must also use the tools that actually exist. The Moscow Mechanism, which Johan Büser mentioned, is such a tool that enables independent expert reviews on site in countries where serious and systematic violations occur.
I also want to agree in welcoming that Sweden, together with other member states in January, finally chose to activate the Moscow Mechanism to act against the serious developments in Georgia. I was there myself as an international election observer during the parliamentary elections. We saw irregularities all over the country and met civil society organizations, opposition representatives, and journalists who expressed a deep concern.
The so-called Russian law had already been adopted at that time, and it was used to pressure independent organizations and media. And since then, we have seen that the situation has only worsened. Especially LGBTQ+ persons have been attacked through hate rhetoric and legislative initiatives that limit their rights and opportunities to be seen in society and even to exist.
That the Moscow Mechanism is now being used shows that OSCE's commitments are not symbolic. But it must not be an exception. It must be a natural part of how we safeguard the organization's norms and the values that the member states are obliged to follow.
We Social Democrats believe that Sweden must be prepared to push to activate the Moscow Mechanism more often. We see that more and more violations are occurring. Therefore, we also need to speak plainly about the systematic dismantling of democracy in Hungary, which also has a variant of the Russian agent law. They ban pride parades, restrict the rights of LGBTQ+ persons by law, have eroded the rule of law, and have silenced civil society and political opposition.
Within the EU, processes are ongoing based on the fact that Hungary does not live up to the union's fundamental values. But Hungary is also a member state in the OSCE. I wonder if the Swedish government is prepared to push to activate the Moscow Mechanism also when it comes to Hungary and if the government considers that the development in Hungary today has reached such a level that it is a tool that now needs to be used. If that is not the case, Madam Speaker, I wonder where the government's limit lies.
Carina Ödebrink (S)
Madam Speaker! I was at the OSCE's winter meeting in Vienna two weeks ago. And last week, as a special envoy for the OSCE's Parliamentary Assembly regarding the deported Ukrainian children, I was invited to Berlin. There, I had the privilege of speaking at one of the largest German conferences, Café Kyiv, about the Ukrainian children. It felt important to be there and to be able to establish contacts with others who are working on the issue.
I would like to thank Johan Büser for raising this important issue. Just as Johan and Linnéa mention, these are incredibly important issues. I am the rapporteur for human rights and democracy in the OSCE's third committee. We see, as mentioned here, that democracy is not only being challenged but is actually under attack. This applies to both hbtqi persons and religious minorities. And women's rights are not just being pushed back, but we see a clear misogyny, Madam Speaker, a hatred of women and a hatred against hbtqi persons.
ODIHR's representative for freedom of the media spoke at the winter meeting about the role of the media today. One is increasingly exposed to threats, harassment, belittling, and ridicule. This particularly affects women. It is incredibly serious. In that case, OSCE – as has been mentioned here – is the platform where we can act, not just react.
Madam Speaker! In the Reichstag building in Berlin – I have never been inside as a guest – I was met by masses of graffiti on the walls, inside the Reichstag building. It is graffiti that the Soviet soldiers had graffitied on the walls on the inside in connection with World War II. It remains.
Madam Speaker! It will be a brutal reminder of how close we are to the immense atrocities that occurred not so long ago. When the wall fell, a kind of positive spirit arose to contribute and change. But now we see a brutal regression with authoritarian leaders who use democracy to destroy democracy.
In my opinion, Sweden has been a humanitarian superpower, and I believe that Sweden should be a humanitarian superpower also in the future. But it is incredibly important not only to react but to actually also be active and act.
To the questions that have already been asked, I can only add that it is important that Sweden's government now maps out a strategy for the future. It is a matter of not only following and making ongoing assessments. One must also have a political direction.
Utrikesministern Maria Malmer Stenergard (M)
Madam Speaker! I intend to dwell a little on the question of analysis, which was raised in the interpellation. I want to clarify that the government follows and analyzes OSCE's role and development as part of its ongoing work.
The Government Offices regularly produce background material based on reports from, among others, the Ministry for Foreign Affairs, the foreign agencies, and OSCE's own institutions and mechanisms. As part of this work, the Government Offices have also commissioned a specific analytical support, through the Centre for Eastern European Studies, on Swedish OSCE policy 50 years after the Helsinki Final Act, which is used in the ongoing work.
These documents highlight how the organization's various parts, such as the field missions, the conflict prevention mechanisms, and the autonomous institutions within the human dimension, function and form the basis for Sweden's actions in OSCE's decision-making forums as well as in matters concerning budget and governance. Against that background, the government draws clear strategic conclusions.
OSSE is a unique platform for political accountability based on common principles and commitments. When the European security order is challenged in a way that is unparalleled since the Cold War, Sweden prioritizes defending OSCE's core mandate within democracy, human rights, and conflict prevention work. Our support for Ukraine's sovereignty and territorial integrity as well as for OSCE's fundamental values remains firm.
I also intend to dwell a little on this matter of presence in the world, as Johan Büser touched upon. He very skillfully avoided mentioning that he and I met at the OSCE ministerial meeting in Malta some years ago. But that was perhaps quite deliberate.
I do not de-prioritize the international meetings at all, Johan Büser. But my priorities look absolutely different compared to the Social Democratic ones. Once during the Social Democrats' years in government 2014–2022, the Social Democratic Prime Minister made a bilateral visit to the Baltics – only once in eight years.
What did one do instead? Well, one traveled the world to promote one's UN candidacy. Back then, Tahiti was much more important than Tallinn. Is it really as Johan Büser suggests that we make an impact in the world?
Johan Büser (S)
Madam Speaker! There is no doubt about where the Social Democrats stand when it comes to the European security order and the commitment to our immediate neighborhood. But we are also engaged in more parts of the world. The Foreign Minister mentioned Tahiti, but the UN is so much larger than Tahiti. The UN encompasses almost all the world's nations. There, of course, a strong commitment is important.
Just a couple of weeks ago, I myself was present at the meeting between the Nordic-Baltic delegations and the American delegation in Vienna in connection with the OSCE Parliamentary Assembly's winter meeting. We discussed the Arctic and Greenland. The meeting was honest and clear – and in the end also positive, I hope. We have become painfully aware that nothing is self-evident anymore in today's world. In order to be able to speak about what is wrong and take a stand against it, it is required that we meet across national borders and participate in the meetings that we have within the framework of our mandates.
That Denmark clearly marks that Greenland's sovereignty is not negotiable is a way to show political leadership. That is how one defends principles. I also saw that steadfastness, to my pleasure, in Denmark's Speaker when I met him in Copenhagen in January to discuss precisely Greenland. OSCE is a forum where these principles shall be defended.
Madam Speaker! I believe that the Foreign Minister and I have some things in common, not least regarding Georgia. It is true that we met at the OSCE Council of Ministers meeting a couple of years ago in Malta. But I missed the Foreign Minister's participation in Vienna, where I instead had to listen to the Cabinet Secretary. I hope that we see each other at the next Council of Ministers meeting instead.
My colleague Linnéa Wickman mentioned the Moscow Mechanism. We think it is good that Sweden activated it in the case of Georgia. One issue that we Social Democrats are pushing is that it is important that the Moscow Mechanism can also be applied regarding the rights of LGBTQI people. We have also submitted a motion on this. I wonder how the Foreign Minister views this. The Moscow Mechanism must be able to be used when serious and systematic crimes against this group are committed, for example when pride is banned or when legislation is targeted at people because of who they are.
I therefore ask the Minister for Foreign Affairs what new concrete initiatives have been taken to strengthen OSCE's role and whether the government is prepared to push forward so that the Moscow Mechanism can be used in cases of gross and systematic crimes against LGBTQI persons.
Linnéa Wickman (S)
Madam Speaker! The Minister for Foreign Affairs did not answer my question regarding the Moscow Mechanism. Should it be activated when it comes to the dismantling of democracy in Hungary and the attacks on the rights of LGBTQI persons, and if so, in what capacity? I hope she can provide an answer in her next contribution, as Sweden's voice in this area is incredibly important.
I would also like to take this opportunity to highlight another development that worries me. In the OSCE Parliamentary Assembly, we see how leading representatives within the party group where the Foreign Minister's party is included are increasingly driving an agenda that focuses on so-called demographic winter. This means that they are questioning the right to abortion and established commitments regarding SRHR – sexual and reproductive health and rights.
I do not doubt the Foreign Minister's own convictions here, but I wonder what the Foreign Minister does towards their own sister parties when there is an ever-clearer shift occurring in this direction. When women's self-determination is reduced to a demographic issue instead of being about rights, we begin to come dangerously close to eroding the norms that OSCE is set to defend. OSCE must not become an arena where value-conservative forces advance their positions at the expense of human rights. But right now, we are seeing a serious norm shift.
That is why I wonder if the Minister for Foreign Affairs intends to act in any way. I also wonder if she feels concern regarding the proposals being put forward and the debate being conducted. We see how value-conservative ideas that attack women's rights are disguised in a language of concern for the demographic development in the OSCE region.
Carina Ödebrink (S)
Madam Speaker! In my previous contribution, I expressed my thanks to Johan Büser for submitting this important interpellation. I would also like to take this opportunity to thank the Minister for Foreign Affairs for having this debate today. The Minister for Foreign Affairs and I have had several debates, and I respect the Minister's commitment. The debates we have had have, in all material respects, concerned the Ukrainian deported children, the support for Ukraine, and the issue of the three OSCE-employed Ukrainian citizens who are currently imprisoned in Russia; their relatives have no or very little knowledge of how they are doing and where they are located. We have had good debates, and on these issues we are in all material respects in agreement in the Riksdag. It is incredibly important, I feel, that the support for Ukraine regarding Russia's war of aggression is united, solid, and very clear.
But just as Linnéa Wickman pointed out, we see worrying trends. Women's rights are being rolled back or questioned. A norm shift is occurring. I think it is a very worrying development. In a number of areas that I have touched upon – media, human rights, democracy – it is important that we stand up and are active. We must act and not just react. The government and the Foreign Minister could be even clearer. This is incredibly important.
Utrikesministern Maria Malmer Stenergard (M)
Madam Speaker! In close cooperation with the EU and like-minded countries, Sweden consistently defends OSCE's core mandate. Compliance with human rights is a security issue. History also shows that internal repression often leads to external aggression. Therefore, OSCE's work with conflict-preventing democratic institutions and the principles of the rule of law is an investment in peace and stability. Sweden also works to ensure that OSCE's open approach towards civil society is protected. In addition to political efforts, Sweden contributes financially through extra-budgetary support to OSCE's activities regarding democracy and human rights.
Last summer, we were proactive in pushing to activate the so-called Moscow Mechanism, which enables independent expert reviews of serious violations of human rights and which has been raised here by the interpellants, with a focus on Russia's treatment of Ukrainian prisoners of war. Furthermore, one of the experts there was Swedish. It is another example of how we contribute. In January this year, we were proactive in pushing to activate the Moscow Mechanism as a result of the deteriorating HR situation in Georgia.
We send long-term and short-term observers to ODIHR's election observation missions. Last year, as chair of the MR committee, Sweden was able to steer the focus towards the most important issues, with support for Ukraine at the center, as it is our most important foreign policy priority. Sweden has a driving role in several informal groupings, including the friendship group for a democratic Belarus.
There is no doubt that the situation regarding human rights in Hungary, not least the rights of hbtqi persons, is truly heading in the wrong direction. It is something that we have discussed many times in this chamber and where many processes are also ongoing, including at the EU level.
The government's direction is that Sweden shall be a constructive and reliable partner in the OSCE with clear commitment to and defense of the OSCE's fundamental values. The message is simple: Sweden stands firm by the Helsinki Accords and the Paris Charter, defends Ukraine's sovereignty and territorial integrity, stands for accountability and safeguards the OSCE's autonomous institutions.
Johan Büser raised the issue of Greenland and the support for its territorial integrity here. I hope it has not escaped anyone's notice that the Swedish government has been very clear in its support. It was also something for which Denmark's Minister for Foreign Affairs expressed great gratitude when he was here a few weeks ago.
In this speech, Fredrik Ahlstedt and Ann-Sofie Alm (both M) concurred.
Johan Büser (S)
Madam Speaker! Thank you, Minister for Foreign Affairs, for today's interpellation debate!
This debate has ultimately been about what kind of Sweden we want to be and, of course, about Sweden's role in the world. There is a clear focus on Ukraine, which is our greatest security policy challenge. When young people in Ukraine die for the European security order and for their country, Sweden must clearly stand up for what is right.
I never forget when I visited Kyiv and Ukraine last year while Kyiv was being attacked. I do not forget when we sat in the shelter. I also do not forget when we stood at the memorial site for young soldiers born in 2003 and killed in 2022, only 19 years old. They did not only defend their territory. They also defended the European security order.
When democracy retreats in Georgia, Sweden shall be a loud voice for democracy, human rights, and the rule of law. When minorities are silenced in several member states, Sweden shall stand up for civil society and the equal value of all people.
OSSE is based on the insight that security and human rights are interconnected. If we weaken the human dimension, we also weaken security. Sweden has historically been a driving force in this work. I hope that we will also be that moving forward.
When we Social Democrats think of OSCE, we also often think of our former Foreign Minister Ann Linde. She took on OSCE with great commitment when she, as Chairperson-in-Office, and Sweden led OSCE's work. Here, I am convinced that there is inspiration to be drawn for the current Swedish government.
I also hope that the Foreign Minister can take with him the question of pushing that the Moscow Mechanism can also be activated to stand up for LGBTQI persons. It is a proposal that we submit. Thank you for today's debate!
Utrikesministern Maria Malmer Stenergard (M)
Madam Speaker! OSCE is actually the only platform where all European states participate, including Russia. The organization's work is based on commonly agreed principles and commitments, and it has tools for accountability. This makes OSCE relatively unique for ensuring political pressure and responsibility and for defending fundamental norms.
Russia's war of aggression against Ukraine is a violation of international law and the UN Charter and goes against the foundations of the European security order on which the OSCE rests. It does not make the OSCE irrelevant, on the contrary. The OSCE is today an important forum for documenting abuses, defending democracy and providing support to countries threatened by Russian aggression. Sweden uses the OSCE where the organization makes the greatest difference to stand up for human rights and to hold Russia accountable for its abuses.
In conclusion, I would like to say something about the criticism regarding my absence at a meeting in OSCE. Every year I receive several invitations to meetings in OSCE, UN, EU, CBSS, NB8, N5 and Nato. The latter four are meeting formats where social democratic foreign ministers practically never participated. This was partly because they did not exist and partly because we were not members.
It shows something about how much we have to do out there in the world. In a world with practically unlimited opportunities to work, one must prioritize. Then we prioritize what is truly most important for the security of the Swedes.
As is known, one cannot as Foreign Minister travel all the time. One must also be here in the chamber to participate in interpellation debates. I would like to thank you for this debate.
In this speech, Ann-Sofie Alm (M) concurred.
Source: The Swedish Parliament. The speeches come from the open data of the Riksdag, translated into English by AI, which may contain errors.