Response to interpellation 2025/26:573 on the USA's war against Iran

Utrikesministern Maria Malmer Stenergard (M)

Mr. Speaker! If I had known that this was Carina Ödebrinks' very last debate in the chamber, I would of course have noted it. I wish her all the best in the future!

Mr. Speaker! Håkan Svenneling has asked me if I intend to raise that the US attacks may constitute a violation of international law in the bilateral relations with the USA. Håkan Svenneling has also asked me in what way I will act for a continued de-escalation in the Middle East between the USA and Iran, but also between Israel and Lebanon. Finally, Håkan Svenneling has asked me how I and the Swedish government will act to support the Iranian people's right to democracy and freedom.

I share Håkan Svennelling's concern regarding the situation in Iran and the broader region. The Iranian regime bears a great responsibility for the negative developments in the Middle East. Iran's nuclear program has violated the country's obligations under the non-proliferation agreement, the country supports several terrorist organizations in the region, and exerts a brutal oppression against its own population. From the very beginning, I have been clear that it is difficult to see that the attacks by the USA and Israel were compatible with international law. Nor are Iran's attacks against its neighboring countries compatible with international law.

We find ourselves in a sensitive stage where attacks from both the USA and Iran are occurring again, while there is great uncertainty regarding the future of the fragile agreement.

The government is working continuously to promote de-escalation in the Middle East, including between Israel and Lebanon. We do this, among other things, through clear action within the EU and the UN as well as bilaterally, not least in talks with regional partners in the region. I personally visited Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, and Qatar at the beginning of the summer to show the government's solidarity with these countries, which have been hit hard by Iran's attacks, and to hold discussions on how we can best contribute to regional stability.

The government stands and will continue to stand behind the brave Iranian women and men who fight for their human rights, including freedom of expression and assembly, to be respected. We do this partly through our aid, and partly by working for increased international pressure against the Iranian regime. During the spring, the government decided on a support of 10 million kronor to human rights defenders and other actors who in various ways work for increased freedom of expression and respect for human rights in Iran. Sweden has also been a driving force in the EU for sanction listings against Iran, including the terrorist listing of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard IRGC and sanctions against regime representatives who are responsible for the deadly violence against peaceful protesters at the beginning of the year. That work will continue.

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Håkan Svenneling (V)

Mr. Speaker! Due to developments in the world, I have submitted two interpellations to the Minister for Foreign Affairs which we are to debate today. Both interpellations were submitted quite a while ago, already before Midsummer, and are therefore quite general in their design and character. During the summer, I received an email with a question about how interpellations work and therefore wish to clarify that.

Unfortunately, we have seen the US and Israel's war against Iran gain new momentum during the summer. Time and again we have heard US President Donald Trump say that an agreement is very close, and then the attacks between the countries have gained momentum again.

It is obvious that we live in a dangerous time, where peace is not promoted in the same way as before. Above all, the superpower USA repeatedly undermines international law. This has been shown, not least by Trump's ideas regarding Greenland. USA's warfare also has record-low support among the American people. It is not an overly bold guess that it will become a heavy burden for the Republicans in the autumn midterm elections.

We in Sweden are also greatly affected. The Strait of Hormuz has become the scene for many of the attacks, especially the naval blockades, which both Iran and the USA have initiated. It is otherwise a global, important and decisive transport route. In industry after industry that I encounter in this election campaign, the concern is great when prices on input materials skyrocket as a consequence of the war.

It is obvious that this war should never have been started. But at the same time, the regime in Iran is one of the cruelest regimes on our earth. The Iranian people have shown time and again that they have had enough. Woman, life, freedom still echoes around the world and has been so ever since the last election in Sweden. Jina Mahsa Amini was murdered by the Iranian regime just days after we went to the polls that time.

Mr. Speaker! Much has happened with Sweden's Iran policy during this parliamentary term. It has been significantly tightened, and the consensus between the parties in the Riksdag has increased. We have also finally brought the EU along.

The pressure on the Iranian regime is harder than ever. But if we had the recipe for how to bring the regime down, it would have already fallen. Donald Trump thought it was enough to kill many in the Iranian leadership. But that has turned out to be wrong.

Now it is absolutely crucial how Sweden and Sweden's government act. Not to clash with Donald Trump has for a long time been a new and rather strange guiding principle for the right-wing government. The Prime Minister has entangled himself in some reasoning about what he calls traditional international law.

Mr. Speaker! There is international law. It is that international law that Donald Trump violates.

Sweden must clearly signal to the USA and Israel that their war violates international law. The Foreign Minister says that she finds it difficult to see that the attacks are compatible with international law. But will she take up that question with the USA and with Israel? When I hear the Foreign Minister's answer, the answer to that question seems to be no. Instead, we see a government whose Defense Minister goes to art museums with these governments' ambassadors. I think that says a lot about the right's foreign policy.

We must also be clear towards the Iranian regime. The years of coddling are over. Support for democracy fighters and pressure on the Iranian government's leadership must be our continued focus. There, I nevertheless feel that the Foreign Minister is clear in his answer to me today.

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Nima Gholam Ali Pour (SD)

Mr. Speaker! This interpellation, which has been submitted by the Left Party, is based on a notion that has repeatedly proven to be wrong, namely that the Iranian regime can be met with diplomacy and negotiations.

The problem is that the Iranian regime uses diplomacy in a completely different way than democratic states do. We know that the regime has used diplomats for influence operations, intelligence activities, and refugee espionage. We also know that the Iranian regime has directed threats and violence against regime critics far beyond Iran's borders, even here in Sweden.

That is why I react when the interpellator writes that the way forward is diplomacy and de-escalation. Diplomacy is a tool that can be used between states that respect international rules of the game. The Iranian regime has repeatedly shown that it does not. It is, after all, a regime that began its rule by storming the US embassy in Tehran and holding American diplomats hostage for over a year.

The same regime has for a long time conducted refugee espionage here in Sweden. In recent years, the regime in Iran has also been linked to assassination plots and the use of criminal networks against persons here in Sweden.

When many Iranians in Sweden demand that the Iranian embassy be closed, they do not do so because they are against diplomacy as a principle. They do so because they know how the regime uses its diplomats. The regime uses its diplomats to harm people, for influence operations, and in intelligence activities.

Therefore, I have a simple question for the interpellator. When the regime in Iran uses diplomacy as a tool for transnational repression and influence operations, why does Vänsterpartiet believe that just more diplomacy with Iran is the solution?

And when the interpellator speaks of de-escalation, I wonder: When will the Iranian regime de-escalate its violence against people here in Sweden?

What is remarkable is that the Left Party for a long time has focused more on reducing the pressure against the Iranian regime than on increasing the pressure against it. The most significant external military pressure against the regime is currently coming from the USA and Israel. It is they who stand between the Iranian people, who are unarmed, and the Iranian regime, which shoots at this people.

The difference between me and the Left Party's foreign policy spokesperson is that I want to see more external pressure on the regime in Iran. When this regime murders 40,000 people in two days, I think the world must pressure the regime in different ways. It is obvious that the Iranian people do not have the tools to do so.

Ending this war today or tomorrow will not lead to democracy in Iran. It will worsen the dictatorship.

I must ask the interpellator how he sees the Iranians overthrowing the mullahs' regime without the support they currently receive from the USA and Israel. Whatever one thinks about this war, one fact remains: If the pressure against the regime disappears, democracy will not prevail; instead, the regime will win.

That is why I ask the interpellator: How are the Iranians to overthrow the mullahs' regime if the external pressure against the regime ceases?

In this speech, Rashid Farivar (SD) agreed.

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Markus Wiechel (SD)

Mr. Speaker! I want to be clear from the outset and say that this is not the USA's war against Iran. It is a war against the Islamist occupying power and thus a war for Iran, and not just for Iran but for the entire free world.

Even today, people are murdered daily. We saw that over 50,000 people were murdered by the regime. They were slaughtered in the streets of Tehran and in other cities.

My questions to the interpellor are: Is that not enough? How far shall it go before the rest of the world reacts and helps? How many shall be massacred and slaughtered?

Article 51 of the UN Charter allows for self-defense in the event of armed attacks. The regime has attacked through proxies, they have threatened with nuclear weapons and they have fired at civilian ships. To strike back against that apparatus is not imperialism. It is to refuse to let the murderers have free rein.

Believe me – the over 50,000 people who sacrificed their lives in Iran and everyone who has been executed since then have not sacrificed their lives for a ceasefire. They have not sacrificed their lives for any form of diplomatic negotiation or for any form of peace agreement with the mullah regime. They died for freedom. They died so that the rest of the world would act and so that this regime would fall.

Mr. Speaker! Before this debate, I chose to take this entire interpellation without comments and paste it into AI to get an answer as to what this was. I quote: Typical Left Party interpellation, where an anti-imperialist line is pursued. USA and Israel are pointed out as the main problem, while Iran's regime is portrayed as a reacting victim.

Mr. Speaker! I have great respect for Håkan Svenneling as a member of Parliament. But how is it that socialists always happen to end up on the same side as hardline Islamists? It never seems to go wrong. They did it during the revolution in 1979. They have done it in Europe on several occasions. And now, when there is finally a glimmer of hope and some states are actually listening to the freedom-longing Iranian people, they attack precisely those who stand on the people's side against the Islamists.

Mr. Speaker! I want to be very clear in conclusion: Long live the lion and sun revolution! Long live the people of Iran, not the mullahs! May the ruthless monsters who currently occupy Iran fall!

(Applause)

In this speech, Rashid Farivar (SD) agreed.

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Utrikesministern Maria Malmer Stenergard (M)

Mr. Speaker! Naturally, many questions are raised in this debate. First and foremost, we think of the Iranian population, who have been oppressed for so long and who in many ways have fared even worse as a result of the developments of the recent months. In part, it is difficult to find out what the situation looks like, because the internet is restricted. I personally think a lot about the girls who are forced to grow up under oppression and who cannot realize themselves.

In recent months, it has also become clear that what is happening in the Gulf affects us here at home very much. We are getting higher energy prices. Thousands of Swedes were stranded in the region during the initial phase of the conflict. The threats are increasing against American, Jewish, and Israeli interests even here in Sweden.

For me as Foreign Minister, it is obvious to do everything I can to safeguard Swedish interests in the region, such as freedom of navigation, and to counter the threat from Iran even here at home. We do this best by being on the ground and having exchange with the countries in the region that now function as mediators. That was why I traveled to Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, and Qatar at the beginning of the summer. If we want Sweden to be an actor, we must have exchange with these countries, which Social Democratic governments made enemies with and which the Left Party has wanted to stop the export of defense materiel to. It is about materiel such as the radar surveillance system Global Eye, which will truly come into use in light of Iran's attacks against countries in the region, also to protect civilians.

Now we are cooperating in this government with the Gulf countries to promote common interests. Sweden has also participated in recent months in the format with about fifty countries initiated by the United Kingdom and France to discuss the conditions for assisting in a future reopening of the Strait of Hormuz. The government decided on July 2 to initially contribute staff officers to the planning of a French-British operation to secure free navigation in the Strait of Hormuz specifically. We are also considering contributing mine-clearing capacity in the long term. Naturally, basic prerequisites must be in place, not least the legal basis for the operation.

In all of this, our regional partners are central to ensuring stability in the region. During the conflict, both the Swedish government and representatives for the EU have had close dialogue with our colleagues in the Gulf to express our solidarity but also to discuss how we can best contribute to stability. We will continue with that.

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Håkan Svenneling (V)

Mr. Speaker! The Islamist regime in Iran has, in addition to the war against Israel and the USA, also waged a brutal war against its own population. People's demands for democracy, economic stability, an end to the rule of the mullahs and kleptocracy, and respect for fundamental human freedoms and rights are met with ruthless violence and brutal murder. The nationwide protests that broke out at the end of last year were directed against the entire Islamist power structure. The security forces responded with mass arrests, tear gas, and deadly live ammunition. Each one of them who died was someone's child, someone's parent, or someone's sister. They are people whose only crime is their demands for freedom.

The killings on Iranian streets must be stopped. That the Revolutionary Guard IRGC has been designated as a terrorist organization by the EU is an important step that the Left Party, together with other parties here in the Riksdag and the government, has pushed for. The Iranian regime has for decades committed gross violations of human rights through imprisonment, torture, and brutal violence against its own population. Those responsible for the crimes must be held accountable, and the Left Party wants to see more targeted sanctions as soon as possible at the EU and UN level against key figures in the Iranian leadership.

Mr. Speaker! US President Donald Trump has on repeated occasions attempted to pressure other NATO countries, such as Sweden, to support the US and Israel's war against Iran. It is clear how the USA expects other NATO countries to act loyally towards American interests rather than as independent states within the framework of a common military alliance. When Spain refused to support the US's war against Iran, Trump threatened to stop all trade with the country. In May, we heard how Trump threatened that the US's tiny, tiny support for Ukraine would be withdrawn if other NATO countries did not support the US against Iran. Now, however, the relationship with Ukraine seems to have improved somewhat, and for Ukraine's sake, we must hope that the American support actually increases.

Sweden must, together with other countries, clearly signal that we do not intend to follow the USA's lead. The Swedish government has been unclear – we also heard this in what the Foreign Minister just reported – regarding whether it intends to send military personnel to the region to uphold a potential agreement between the USA and Iran. It is a dangerous region. Previous decisions not to participate in military operations have proven to be correct. The missions that Sweden has participated in under American leadership have not always ended so well. I believe it is wise to think both once and twice before Sweden sets out on a military adventure in this region – we do not know where it ends.

So, as for the Sweden Democrats' attack against us! I imagine and hope that the Sweden Democrats will have every reason to submit this type of interpellation to a new red-green government after the 2026 election. It is governments that one interpellates, not the interpellants themselves.

I also believe that it is the case that the Foreign Minister and I are more in agreement with each other than with the Sweden Democrats in this situation. Pure diplomacy, as the Foreign Minister mentions in connection with the Gulf, is the way forward rather than what the Sweden Democrats advocate: more war and less international law, which becomes the result of the policy the party wants to pursue.

Let me remind the Sweden Democrats that it was my interpellation regarding the Iranian people's protests in January that led to a unanimous Riksdag pushing a foreign minister who had strong support behind him to go down to Brussels and get the terror designation of the IRGC through.

We want to see freedom for the Iranian people. That is why we continue to shout: Woman, life, freedom! We continue that struggle – instead of war and conflict.

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Nima Gholam Ali Pour (SD)

Mr. Speaker! However tragic this war is, it is currently the only way forward in the Middle East. Those who think otherwise must explain certain things. They must explain how one sees a democratic future in Iran if the Western world starts negotiating with the regime again and gives it a legitimacy that it does not have. They must also explain how the Middle East's future will look if the USA backs down to Iran and the militias again begin to move forward their positions.

Let us remind everyone that the regime has proxy groups at its disposal in Yemen, Iraq, and Lebanon.

The regime in Iran has in practice created chaos in these countries. The terrorism that the mullahs' regime has conducted in these countries is appalling. The Iranian regime has exported militias and terrorism. It is in no way a regime that has only defended its own territory. Not so long ago, Iran also had forces in Syria until they were expelled from there.

The Left Party often speaks about international law when the USA acts. But when Iran has for years violated the sovereignty of other states through its proxy militias, we have heard significantly less from the Left Party. Why is that?

Today we have the Left Party's foreign policy spokesperson here, who urges the government to work to close the only opportunity that the Iranians have today to achieve a regime change. If the pressure against the regime decreases, who benefits then? Is it the democratic opposition, or is it the mullahs? For me, the answer is obvious.

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Markus Wiechel (SD)

Mr. Speaker! It is very good that the representative for Vänsterpartiet stands and speaks about international law, but start then with the murderous regime. Speak then about the regime's mass murders, mass executions, rape, and everything else. Attack that apparatus! Then you stand on the people's side, but not now. It is exactly as Nima Gholam Ali Pour said earlier: It is between the people, who are unarmed, and the regime that we have USA and Israel.

These people did not die for a 14-point agreement or for anything else, they died for freedom. To now prioritize de-escalation with the same regime is to betray the people.

It is a bit funny that people here are talking about how we might eventually have to stand here and debate with a left-wing Foreign Minister after the election. What was it we saw last time?

We had a Social Democratic Foreign Minister who cooed at the Iranian embassy in Lidingö when the Islamists' national day was celebrated. We had Social Democrats who conducted trade with the murderer regime and ignored all human rights defenders and everyone else who protested.

It was the Social Democrats who did this. The Social Democrats were anything but on the side of the Iranian people. We have seen that time and again. It never fails, just as I said. Socialists always seem to run the errands of the Islamists.

Mr. Speaker! Last but not least: This is probably my final speech in the Riksdag. Warmly welcome to Sweden and the Swedish Parliament, my dear friend Dan, one of my closest friends from high school!

I apologize for breaking the rules and speaking English.

(Applause)

(FIRST DEPUTY SPEAKER: It was a short segment in English, and it is accepted.)

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Utrikesministern Maria Malmer Stenergard (M)

Mr. Speaker! Now I believe we must correct some things that have been said here earlier.

I was very clear, and I have also been very clear when I have accounted for this in various contexts linked to the Riksdag, that it is staff officers that we are sending, with the purpose of maintaining free navigation in the Strait of Hormuz. Regardless of what one thinks about the war, it is a Swedish interest to maintain it. I hope that Håkan Svenneling and I are in agreement on that.

I must also remind Håkan Svenneling that in the event that an armed troop were to be sent, which has in no way been on the agenda, it is the Riksdag that decides on that and not the government. I hope that this can reassure Håkan Svenneling in that regard.

Then I must turn to what Nima Gholam Ali Pour said about war being the only way forward. Well, nothing with the war so far has made the situation better for the poor women and men who are suffering in Iran.

Many of us hoped, regardless of what one thinks about the international law basis, that it would lead to change. But so far, it has only resulted in Iran becoming even more closed off, people having it even worse, and the IRGC tightening its grip even further. Furthermore, the IRGC has learned a number of things from last year's twelve-day war to further strengthen its military capabilities.

I believe that one should be very careful about believing that war and bombing a country would lead to a long-term solution. Instead, we must, of course, continue to exert pressure. When we speak of diplomacy, it does not just mean having a passive role or making statements. It is also about doing exactly what we have done and what we have heard about here earlier in the chamber.

It is about exerting pressure through, for example, sanctions against the IRGC. I am very grateful that we have had full backing from the chamber. I hope that moving forward we can push for a line where we truly protect the civilian population, put more pressure on the Iranian regime, and where Sweden can participate and contribute in various ways to constructive solutions.

I also want to clarify, in relation to what Håkan Svenneling said here, that it is not the case that we are following the USA's lead when we are now trying to help ensure free navigation in the Strait of Hormuz. What we are participating in is under the leadership of France and the United Kingdom, just so we clear that up.

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Håkan Svenneling (V)

Mr. Speaker! Through this interpellation, I have wanted to highlight the situation in Iran and, in large, in the Middle East. We, as Swedish politicians, have a responsibility to support democratic forces in Iran. This is something that the Foreign Minister and I clearly agree on.

I think that the answers we receive from the Minister for Foreign Affairs regarding the Swedish military troop are good and correct. My ambition was to hold up a warning finger based on historical examples. This is a question that we must return to. I am fully aware that it is the British-French initiative that Sweden is working within the framework of.

I have thought that Sweden should be clearer in its voice towards the USA and Israel that this violates the principles of international law. This also applies to Iran, which also violates international law. We also have a responsibility as Swedish politicians to stand up for international law regardless of which party it is that violates it. It is here that I think the government has been unclear and slow in reaching that point.

Sweden needs to be an actor and a champion for peace globally during the next mandate period, clearly speaking out on the principles of international law. There are plenty of countries in our world around us that do so, for example our neighboring country Norway, which has a much clearer policy in this area.

I hope that with a red-green election victory it could be possible to conduct a foreign policy where we are clear about international law. We shall also have a clear policy where we do not deport people back to Iran and to the oppression in Iran. We have seen examples of that during this parliamentary term.

I have sat in the Riksdag for many years. I have had no problem with interpellating Social Democratic ministers when I have thought they have been wrong about Iran. I will continue to fight during the next parliamentary term regarding Iran. I am convinced that the Swedish Riksdag will do so even without Markus Wiechel's great commitment.

I hope that the message will continue to be freedom for all the people of Iran. I believe that has been the foundation during these four years. We have increased the unity and strengthened Sweden's voice. This will hopefully one day lead to freedom for all the people of Iran.

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Utrikesministern Maria Malmer Stenergard (M)

Mr. Speaker! I forgot that the Sweden Democrats did not have the opportunity to have further contributions. We will simply continue the debate here outside the chamber.

As we have already noted, it is a very difficult situation for those who fight for human rights in Iran. We must support them in the ways we can. Therefore, the government decided in February to provide support of 10 million kronor to human rights defenders, democracy advocates, and other actors working for increased freedom of expression in Iran.

We will also continue to work to ensure that the situation regarding human rights is highlighted in various international forums so that the EU continues to adopt sanctions against those who are responsible for human rights violations in Iran.

Sweden stood behind a request to convene a special session in the UN Human Rights Council this spring. This also led to an urgent investigation of the ongoing and recently committed violations, among other things in order to be able to contribute to accountability.

As late as July this year, the EU adopted new MR sanctions against Iran, including against a judge who was directly involved in the flawed process that led to a Swedish citizen being executed in March. Sweden was, of course, also a driving force behind that decision.

The work to safeguard human rights in Iran has never been more important. Sweden will not turn a blind eye. We will not be silent, but we will continue to act.

I would like to thank you for a very important interpellation. I hope that during the next parliamentary term, in some way and in some constellation, we have the opportunity to return to this debate.

Finally, I would also like to thank Markus Wiechel for the debate and for his time in the Riksdag. I wish him warm success.

Dan, I also want to welcome you to the Swedish Parliament!

The interpellations debate was hereby concluded.

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)