Response to interpellation 2025/26:335 on Sweden's position on Western Sahara
Translated from Swedish by AI; the translation may contain errors. The Swedish text is the original.
Summary AI, written in advance
1 M argues that Sweden's international law position remains firm and that the government gives its full support to the UN envoy's work for a sustainable solution 1. M argues that Sweden has expressed support for Morocco's autonomy plan as a credible basis for negotiations 1 2. M emphasizes that the government's line is to safeguard the trade relationship with Morocco and the fisheries policy while international law is respected 1 3. M argues that Sweden has pointed out the importance of a just, sustainable, and mutually acceptable solution 4. 5 S argues that the government should not give political support to the occupying power's autonomy plan as it does not align with the principle of self-determination 5 6. S argues that the Western Saharan people must be allowed to decide their own future and that all alternatives, including independence, must be on the table 6 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.
Utrikesministern Maria Malmer Stenergard (M)
Madam Speaker! Johan Büser has asked me how I and the government intend to concretely work to ensure that international law and the Western Saharawis' right to self-determination are respected, and how I and the government justify our approach to the EU's trade and fisheries partnership agreement with Morocco in light of the European Court of Justice's ruling that Western Sahara may not be included.
Sweden's position in international law remains firm. In the issue of Western Sahara, Sweden gives its full support to the UN envoy's work to achieve a sustainable and just political solution within the framework of the UN-led process.
Through resolution 2797/2025, which the UN Security Council adopted in October 2025, we are now in a new situation where a possible solution to the long-standing and difficult-to-solve conflict in Western Sahara is within reach. The resolution provides a framework for the negotiations, whose explicit goal is to achieve a solution that is consistent with the UN Charter, which is mutually accepted by the parties and which accommodates the Western Saharan people's right to self-determination. The exact forms of self-determination are a matter for the parties.
Sweden wants to be involved and contribute to a solution. In light of the Security Council resolution, Sweden has expressed support for Morocco's autonomy plan as a credible basis for negotiations. The government also has close contact with the UN envoy de Mistura to ensure maximum support for his and the UN's efforts.
Respect for international law is also central when it comes to the EU's and Morocco's association agreement as well as the partnership agreement on sustainable fisheries.
As the Court of Justice of the EU established in its judgment on 4 October 2024, the Union's actions in international contexts must be compatible with international law, including the UN Charter.
For both the amendments to the trade agreement and the negotiation of the fisheries partnership agreement, the EU's starting point has been to safeguard the trade relationship with Morocco and the common fisheries policy, while international law is respected in accordance with what the Court of Justice of the European Union has established. It is also the government's position.
Johan Büser (S)
Madam Speaker! In a time when the international legal order is being tested from several sides, a question becomes particularly decisive: whether we mean international law seriously or whether we only defend it when it is politically convenient. I am thinking of the government's different yardsticks and different actions when it comes to a number of different countries. It concerns Russia's invasion of Ukraine. It concerns Israel's occupation of Palestine. It also concerns Western Sahara and the Moroccan occupation.
Western Sahara has since 1975 been occupied by Morocco and is still counted by the UN as a non-decolonized territory or, if you will, Africa's last colony. After 16 years of war, a ceasefire was reached in 1991 and an agreement that the Western Saharan people would be allowed to determine their future through a referendum on independence. That referendum has not yet taken place. In the meantime, the occupation has continued.
Morocco has built a wall through the territory, moved in settlers and exploited Western Sahara's natural resources – from phosphate to fish. The Foreign Minister certainly recognizes that discussion from the EU Committee. At the same time, Western Saharan activists are subjected to repression. Amnesty and Freedom House testify to how demonstrators are beaten down and how people demanding self-determination are persecuted.
Madam Speaker! For my part, the engagement in the issue began already during my time in the Social Democratic Youth League SSU. Over the years, I have had the opportunity to visit the West Saharan refugee camps on several occasions, even in my role as a Member of Parliament.
I still remember the feeling when I arrived at the camps in the Algerian desert. Tens of thousands of people live there in exile – in some cases for generations – waiting to be able to return to their own country. Despite the difficult conditions, one is met upon arriving there by a dignity, an organization, and a perseverance that makes a strong impression.
During one of these trips, I also participated in the Sahara Marathon. Running through the desert together with West Saharans and international participants is more than a sporting event. It is a manifestation of a peaceful struggle. That is what I thought of when my feet met the sands of the Sahara and there was only a blue sky above.
What strikes one most strongly is precisely this: The Western Saharawis have for decades chosen the peaceful path. It has occurred through UN processes, through diplomacy and through international solidarity, but all too often they are met with silence and ignorance from the rest of the world.
Madam Speaker! It is against this background that the government's realignment of Sweden's policy on the Western Sahara issue causes such great concern. I cannot quite say it is disappointment. There were certainly many of us who watched Agenda yesterday and took notice when Prime Minister Ulf Kristersson, in the interview about Iran, did not seem to have a grasp of fundamental international law and international law.
When it comes to Western Sahara, Sweden has for a long time had a clear line: to stand up for international law and for the Western Saharawis' right to self-determination. But now the government expresses support for the occupying power Morocco's autonomy plan as a "credible basis for negotiations." This is a very problematic position.
The autonomy plan is the occupying power's own proposal and is based on the premise that Western Sahara shall remain under Moroccan sovereignty. This means in practice that independence does not exist as a real alternative. It is difficult to see how this plan can be reconciled with the principle of self-determination.
Therefore, I want to ask the Minister for Foreign Affairs: How does the government justify supporting Morocco's autonomy plan while simultaneously claiming to stand up for the Western Saharawis' right to self-determination?
Utrikesministern Maria Malmer Stenergard (M)
Madam Speaker! It is absolutely crucial for Sweden's security and the stability of the world that the rules-based world order and international law, including the UN Charter, are upheld. It is Sweden's firm conviction that international law, including the UN Charter, is a necessary tool to achieve a peaceful solution to conflicts in general, and so also for the long-standing conflict in Western Sahara. Sweden's international law position on that issue stands firm. We stand fully and completely behind the Western Saharan people's right to self-determination.
After 50 years of conflict and humanitarian crises, a sustainable solution to the conflict is more than welcome. The UN Security Council resolution from October 2025 marks a shift by highlighting Morocco's autonomy plan as a credible basis for negotiations. In line with the Security Council resolution, the government has therefore expressed support for Morocco's autonomy plan as a credible basis to achieve a solution that is consistent with the UN Charter, mutually accepted by the parties, and that meets the Western Saharan people's right to self-determination.
The Moroccan autonomy plan, however, needs to be specified and updated. We therefore look forward to receiving the updated proposal for the autonomy plan as well as other constructive contributions from the parties.
And with the shift in position that the Security Council resolution has prompted, Sweden has now joined a broad majority of like-minded countries, for example Finland, Denmark, the United Kingdom, France, Estonia, Poland, the Netherlands, Belgium, Germany and now also the EU. It is clear that it is a new situation and a new momentum in the Western Sahara issue.
My question is therefore: Will the Social Democrats update their analysis, just as the EU has now done collectively? Does one want to contribute to an end to the conflict and if so how? And how does one view the UN Security Council's resolution?
Johan Büser (S)
Madam Speaker! The commitment to the Western Sahara issue within the Social Democratic Party has been and continues to be very strong, but we do not change our opinion on the issue just because a number of countries are changing their line and doing as the occupying power Morocco wants. We do not intend to make ourselves victims of the occupying power Morocco's lobbying, which has obviously been very successful in Europe among several countries but also with the Swedish Ministry for Foreign Affairs. I regret that.
The International Court of Justice already established in 1975 that Morocco does not have sovereignty over Western Sahara. The European Court of Justice most recently ruled in 2024 that the EU's trade and fisheries agreements with Morocco cannot include Western Sahara because the territory is separate and the Western Saharawis have not given their consent.
Despite this clear international legal basis, the government chooses to give political support to the occupying power's own proposal. That is what we heard from the Foreign Minister here. The Foreign Minister refers in his answer to the UN Security Council's resolution from October 2025 and argues that it opens up for a new situation in the conflict. But a Security Council resolution does not change fundamental international law.
The right to self-determination is what international law calls jus cogens – a compelling norm. For me, who is fundamentally a lawyer, it is important that one keeps the legal terms in order. Jus cogens applies regardless of political compromises and regardless of which powers are pushing forward in the Security Council or lobbying regularly at the Ministry for Foreign Affairs. It applies regardless of geopolitics. It applies regardless of which states consider a certain solution to be politically convenient.
It is therefore difficult to understand the government's logic. On one hand, it is said that the Western Saharawis have a right to self-determination, but on the other hand, one supports a plan based on Moroccan sovereignty.
My answer to the Foreign Minister is that for us Social Democrats, the principle is clear: A people who have lived under occupation for half a century must be allowed to decide their own future themselves. For us Social Democrats, this is a crucial point. Real self-determination must mean that the Western Saharan people themselves get to decide their future and that all options are on the table, including independence. To pre-emptively lock the solution within the framework of Moroccan sovereignty risks instead legitimizing an occupation that has already been ongoing for several decades.
Madam Speaker! I also want to mention something about the exploitation of Western Sahara's natural resources. Here, Sweden remains relatively silent. The trade in fish, phosphate, and other resources from the occupied territory continues. This means that economic interests, which so often are the driving force in international conflicts, continue to be tied to a situation that is, according to international law, illegal. It is also one of the central issues in this conflict. Western Sahara has, for the sake of information, some of the world's richest phosphate deposits. The fishing waters off the coast are among the most resource-rich in the world. These are resources that belong to the Western Saharan people, Madam Speaker, but which today are exploited under occupation.
Therefore, the question of international law becomes not only principled but also very concrete. If international courts clearly establish that Western Sahara is a separate territory, states and international organizations must also act in accordance with this.
My follow-up question to the Minister for Foreign Affairs is therefore: How does the government intend to ensure that Sweden's policy actually aligns with the European Court of Justice's ruling and with the principle that Western Sahara's natural resources belong to its own people?
Utrikesministern Maria Malmer Stenergard (M)
Madam Speaker! The European Court of Justice ruled in its judgment on 4 October 2024 that the EU's actions in international contexts must be compatible with international law, including the UN Charter. The Court also stated that while the people of Western Sahara must give their consent for an international agreement between the EU and Morocco to be implemented on Western Sahara's territory, such consent could be given implicitly under certain conditions.
As a consequence of the judgment, the EU decided last autumn on amendments to the association agreement with Morocco. The amendments have, among other things, concerned the introduction of requirements for country-of-origin labeling for certain products and that a monitoring mechanism shall be established to ensure that the benefits from the agreement come to the people of Western Sahara. From the EU's side, the purpose of the amendments to the trade parts of the association agreement has thus been precisely that the ruling of the EU Court of Justice and international law are respected and that the trade relationship with Morocco is protected.
This has also been the government's line. I, who am also a lawyer and have additionally worked as a lawyer, also think it is very important that the law is followed.
Regarding the EU's fisheries partnership agreement with Morocco, it has been dormant since 2023 because there is no current implementation protocol. At the beginning of 2026, the EU Commission was authorized to initiate negotiations on a new fisheries partnership agreement with an implementation protocol. The EU's entry into the process is that a new fisheries partnership agreement should meet the Union's needs and be compatible with the common fisheries policy while the outcome of the Court of Justice of the EU's ruling is respected. Sweden naturally supports this work.
Johan Büser (S)
Madam Speaker! I would like to thank the Minister for Foreign Affairs for the debate.
I also want to remind the Minister for Foreign Affairs that this debate is about consequences according to international law. Sweden claims to be a strong voice for international law.
We often criticize together Russia's invasion of Ukraine and many other crimes against international law. But we Social Democrats believe, obviously in contrast to the government, that international law must apply everywhere. International law must apply in Europe. International law must apply in the Middle East, even though we saw Ulf Kristersson waver on this yesterday when it concerned Iran, and international law must apply in Western Sahara. If we accept that a territory can be occupied for half a century without its people being allowed to decide their future, we risk undermining the very rule of law that we claim to defend.
Madam Speaker! The Western Saharawis have waited for over 50 years to exercise their right to self-determination. The least one can demand of the Swedish government is that it stands by the principle that has for so long been guiding in Swedish foreign policy – that all peoples shall have equal rights and be able to decide their own future.
For us Social Democrats, it means that we cannot accept a solution that in advance limits the Western Saharawis' right to choose their own future. That is what Morocco's autonomy plan does, which the Foreign Minister both supports and defends here in the chamber today.
I would therefore like to conclude with a final question to the Minister for Foreign Affairs. The Minister for Foreign Affairs has said that the government accepts the autonomy plan. How will the government concretely work to ensure that the Western Saharawis are able to exercise their right to self-determination, and how will this happen in practice?
Utrikesministern Maria Malmer Stenergard (M)
Madam Speaker! Sweden has repeatedly pointed out the importance of a just, sustainable, and mutually acceptable solution to the Western Sahara issue in accordance with the UN Security Council resolutions and the UN Charter. Over the years, Sweden has also contributed significant core support to the UN agencies that operate in the Western Saharan refugee camps in southern Algeria.
A solution to the Western Sahara issue would be positive for the entire region's stability and economic development and, not least, give the Western Saharan people self-determination and a vision for the future. It is also this path that is laid out in the resolution.
Let me underline the opportunity that we now face. Finally, there is a momentum to reach a solution to a conflict that has lasted for five decades. This is not about choosing sides, but about supporting the work to move forward. The important thing now is, therefore, to support the UN-led work and process and Staffan de Mistura's work to achieve a mutually accepted solution where the UN Charter is respected because international law is important and where the West Saharan people's right to self-determination is also met.
Source: The Swedish Parliament. The speeches come from the open data of the Riksdag, translated into English by AI, which may contain errors.