svensk politik Archives • Page 6 of 10 • SwedeInternational

10 sep. – new appointments

Two new ministers, an ex-minister gets the EU’s migration portfolio and and an ex-party leader goes back into uniform. Where to start?

When Margot Wallström said buh-bye to the Foreign Minister job there weren’t really a lot of candidates to replace her. It had to be a woman, so that narrowed it right down too. Today, we got the formal word that the new Minister for Foreign Affairs will be Ann Linde, previously Minister for Foreign Trade, with responsibility for Nordic affairs.

This is not particularly surprising, and she’ll likely continue with a feminist foreign policy (but without the fanfare). However, her appointment is far from unquestioned: Linde showed incredibly poor judgement when she heard about the data leaks at the Swedish Transport Agency (Transportstyrelsen) – and didn’t do anything. Let’s hope she’s learned something, or Sweden’s security is in shaky hands. A minor, but likely painful, problem will be all the coming meetings with foreign representatives who will no doubt think, however briefly, of Anna Lindh, the well known and popular Foreign Minister who met a tragic end in 2003.

The new Minister for Employment, Eva Nordmark, will also have to fill large shoes. Nordmark comes from TCO, The Swedish Confederation of Professional Employees where she has been chair. TCO is an umbrella organization for 13 different white-collar unions and as far as anyone knows, is skeleton free. The Ministry for Employment is responsible for “the labour market, the work environment, gender equality, human rights at national level, children’s rights and the introduction of newly arrived immigrants,” so not so piddly.

Meanwhile, the previous Minister for Employment, Ylva Johansson, is in Brussels and looks to be getting the dubious honor, but important position, of heading up EU’s Home Affairs office. The EU commission is the executive branch of the EU, proposing legislation and implementing decisions (nod here to Wikipedia) – at Home Affairs, Johansson will be working on easy stuff like migration issues and security. EU commissioner von der Leyen described Johansson as “hands-on. If you want something to be done, ask her”(t.sr.se/SRJohansson).

There’s going to be a lot of asks, as there is a lot that people want done. Or not. Some people want their own migration policy and not EU deciding it for them. Getting 28 countries to agree on a migration policy is, well, as the Chinese have it “when the sun rises in the west.”

Finally, Major Jan Björklund is back on the job. This time, not as Liberal Party leader but as acting operations leader in Middle Military Region’s command staff (). Though he couldn’t introduce discipline in schools, it seems like he’s giving it another try in the trenches.

9 sep. – more budget bits

The Green Party, Center Party and Left Party have all had their speeches in the spotlight regarding the budget bits they say they’ve won. The ruling Social Democrats open parliament tomorrow, so today was the Liberal Party’s turn to claim cred for getting something through budget negotiations.

“It’s time to be serious about starting up Sweden’s cement mixers” said Johan Pehrson, group leader for the Liberal Party (). He’s talking about building jails, presumably, not new footwear: The Liberal Party’s message was the 700 million kronor that is going to be allotted to upgrading the whole judiciary system and related instances. Everything from proactive measures to prevent crimes from being committed, to customs enforcement, to police resources, the coast guard and the coroner’s office, to Sweden’s Security Service and legal staffs, to actual penal buildings – they’re all are going to get a slice of the pie.

The question is if the pie is big enough to feed all those hungry mouths. According to the Liberal Party, these efforts are being made due to the persistent and persuasive efforts of their party, but aside from actual numbers there was hardly disagreement about the need for some sort of system restorative. The judicial system (rättsväsendet) gets a little under 50 million kronor in the current budget, so this is a little tonic, not a large one (). Perhaps not coincidentally, the Liberal Party is a little part of the discussion, not a large one.

8 sep. – Wallström’s report card

Sweden’s getting a new minister for foreign affairs. We don’t know who, yet (maybe we’ll know Tuesday with the government declaration – regeringsförklaring), but let’s do a quick evaluation of the last five years of Swedish foreign policy under Wallström.

Margot Wallström will likely be remembered especially for three things: a feminist foreign policy, not signing the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons, and recognizing the state of Palestine. The first, perhaps, will have the most long-lasting impact.

There’s no absolute definition of a feminist foreign policy. It’s new! But we can say, without, hopefully, being way off in the bushes, that a feminist foreign policy proposes that gender equality is both a goal as well as something that is necessary to reach other goals. That means, among other things, that peace is not truly achieved and/or lasting unless women receive equal standing at the negotiating table, that trade agreements need to address women’s industry, that war and civil unrest unequally target women (and other societal segments like the elderly and the young, whose voices are traditionally ignored).

Since Wallström’s original invite, other countries have arrived at the party too. Canada has a Feminist International Assistance Policy (thanks Justin), and France’s foreign policy has been locally dubbed a feminist one, specifying gender-related priorities as a “principle and cross-cutting theme” ( https://www.icrw.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/Defining-Feminist-Foreign-Policy-Brief-revised.pdf).

We know, though, that Sweden simultaneously also completed arms transactions with Saudi Arabia, fulfilling previously signed contracts, keeping Sweden in the remunerative, hi-tech arms game, and saying nada/nothing/zero/what? about the status of women in the kingdom. For some this was a betrayal of a feminist foreign policy, and for others it was a bow to realism.

Not signing the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons was definitely a bow to realism. There was simply no one, except for a sliver of hopefuls, that thought this would be helpful to Sweden, or be productive in attaining world peace. Wallström was thrown a bone in the form of a possible, future, observer status, which was made the most of by an understanding press.

Something that was not particularly popular with the press, or with almost anyone else outside of Sweden, was unilaterally recognizing the state of Palestine. Wallström no doubt intended it to in some way jump start, or shock, negotiations, but didn’t look around and notice that no one else was on the train, particularly our own EU partners. There has not been an slew of copycat recognitions, so it’s been slightly embarrassing and the effect has been minimal.

Not that it’s easy to make a mark. Wallström’s feminist foreign policy is perhaps her best legacy – a vision. An idea of a new path. It’s not that bad for five years.

7 sep. – 70 million kronor to the bees

Little budget crumbs continue to be scattered to the press and public for consumption. Yesterday, it was the Green Party’s time in the sun, who announced how much is proposed to be spent on various climate measures ().

The biggest recipient for climate money is what they call the Great Step for the Environment (klimatkliv). It sounds better, and more western, in Swedish, but is basically a pot of money set aside for local and regional environment initiatives.

The website for the fund, which reads like an infomercial, puts it like this: “Do you have an idea to reduce society’s climate footprint? Then apply for funding from Great Step for the Environment. Through smart, innovative solutions we can reduce greenhouse gases and move towards a more climate-smart society.” Great Step for the Environment is receiving an additional 1.16 billion kronor, for a total of nearly 2 billion kronor in the 2020 budget.

The next Great Step is given to industry to help them change over to a more environmentally friendly way of working. Great Step for Industry (industrikliv) will have about 600 million that can be applied for by businesses that are working to reduce greenhouse gas emissions either in their industrial processes, or through working to collect and store greenhouse gases. Great Step for Industry is not such a great step, perhaps, getting less than half of what GSforE gets.

The following budget items get only less money, and are somewhat less clear in their method:

400 million kronor for steps to look after valuable nature (åtgärder för värdefull natur), which includes national parks, reserves and marshlands
240 million kronor for measures on behalf of the ocean and water environment (åtgärder för havs och vattenmiljö)
200 million kronor for safeguarding valuable nature, (skydd av värdefull natur) like forests
80 million more kronor to document the health of, and changes in, the environment (miljöövervakning)
70 million kronor for measures to help and support pollinators (pollinatörer) – bees, and other important insects) Measures might include, for example, planting more meadows, or flowers planted by roadsides or in the middle of roundabouts, etc.
65 million for clean oceans (literally a drop in the bucket)
50 million for “green cities”

The Swedish Society for Nature Conservation (Naturskyddsverket) is happy not happy. “It’s welcome, but not enough” was the rather predictable response. “The pollinator support is terrific, but where is the tax on pesticides?” was one complaint ().

In total, the budget for environment measures is 2.9 billion kronor, a level that could be a reflection of the level of popularity for the two Green Party leaders (not so popular, see this post). In which case, it’s both awful and ironic that the environment suffers from its association with the Green Party.

6 Sep. – 6 shades of fighting crime

The shooting today on Kungsholmen is perhaps more a news item than politics, but in some cases it’s very hard to separate the two. A case in point is this latest crime: Although it might not be gang-related or occupation-related, it’s still worrying that with all the strict gun laws and increased enforcing and pressure on the police and public awareness it still seems, to someone, that it’s of no particular trouble to get a gun and shoot someone where they stand. Policies shaped by the government are clearly not particularly adequately addressing the issues that allow shootings to happen, this often, and with this level of impunity.

With that in mind, it’s time to revisit the full list of measures to combat crime that Sweden’s political parties – minus the Sweden Democrats – are currently discussing. SvD supplied a list in the paper today (svd.se):

Crown witnesses. Anyone who has watched a single cop drama on TV knows what this is – a suspect can negotiate a reduced charge if they testify against another criminal suspect in a court of law. Everyone hates it that a scumbag gets a reduced charge for narcing on another, but there are plenty of studies that show it’s effective in putting away people that need to be put away.
Anonymous witnesses. No one wants to testify in person against a violent criminal anymore. Evidence has proven that doing this is often extremely bad for one’s health. And one’s family’s health. And for one’s property. And for one’s well-being as it’s really stressful to look over your shoulder every minute of the day. Allowing people to testify anonymously is one suggestion to make more people willing to testify. So far, it’s had some success in the Netherlands, as well as in Denmark and Norway.
Out-of-bounds areas (vistelseförbud). This means that there would be designated areas, particular to the person in question, in which they would not be allowed to set foot. This could be the area in which the person earlier committed a crime, for example. It wouldn’t be for forever, but at least would be for a certain amount of time. The point is to make it difficult to go back to the usual criminal activity, and to make it easier to track down the person if need be.
Stop Shooting projects (sluta skjuta-projekt). This one comes out of the US via Malmö, and the word on its effectiveness there has not yet been tabulated. The idea is that various authorities and welfare agencies share information on certain known, violent criminals in a cooperative effort to divert the criminal paths these people are already on into more wholesome directions. This is the only proposal that the Left Party supports. The other political parties in Sweden are waiting to see what the actual result of these efforts are.
Obligatory expulsion if convicted of serious violent crime or sexual assault. Just to be clear, this would only apply to citizens of foreign countries. Currently, SvD notes, criminals of this category can avoid being banished by claiming a close connection with Sweden and/or that things would go especially badly for them if they were sent back to their country of origin. This measure is only popular with the party of the Sweden Democrats. If it’s popular with anyone else, they’re keeping quiet about it.
Taking away the Youth Sentence Rebate. Convicted criminals that are under 21 years old currently get a reduced sentence, because “youth”. The suggestion to take this away is based on the fact that younger and younger people are committing more and more serious crimes. No one actually thinks they’re going to get caught, regardless of whether they’re 8, 18 or 21, so it’s uncertain what deterrent effect this would have.

Taken one-on-one, it is unlikely that a dip in crime would be the result of anyone of these proposals, but together they would certainly send a signal that crime is being taken more seriously than before. If a signal is enough.

5 sep. – 1% chance of going forward

The Moderate Party came out with a proposal today to reduce the amount of money that is spent on international aid. Currently, Sweden spends 1% of GDP on humanitarian aid and development, more than any other country in proportion to its size.

Although the 1% results in standing ovations from actors on the receiving end on this largess, others are more critical. Serious questions have been raised as to how well the money is actually spent, if it is handled responsibly, if it does any real good, if it even gets to where it’s supposed to go, and even discussions as to what degree aid corrupts and/or undermines organic civil society efforts.

But for those that might be concerned about this turn of events, there’s no need to worry: The Moderate Party proposal is basically dead in the water. A large part of Sweden’s self image is caught up in that 1% and touching that magic number could cause a national crisis. Even a close look at the aid budget at all is a risky venture for any politician, as a chunk of this development money goes to things that don’t jibe with the image of small children finally attending school in impoverished regions in the world. Although an economic and effectiveness argument can be made for their proposal, there isn’t a single political win in it. We’re not going to see this go forward in the near future.

4 sep. – Center visits the country

Little foretastes of the coming national budget continue to land on the proverbial palate. Like it or not. Besides the Green Party’s “free year” and the Left Party’s bank tax, the Center Party has apparently finagled a rural tax reduction (). Almost everyone living in Norrland, Dalarna, parts of Värmland and parts of Dalsland will be able to write a bit off of their taxes because they live in a low population area, or, as they’re known in official-speak “support area A and B” (stödområden).

“It’s all about being fair, and reducing the tax difference between city and country” said Annie Lööf, Center Party leader. She also motivated the tax reduction by noting that country residents often pay some of the highest local municipality taxes but generally receive fewer services (read: a health clinic or dentist in the area, or a local unemployment office) in return.

About 830,000 people are eligible for the rebate, to the tune of about 140 kronor a month, per person. On a national level, the reduced tax is expected to cost about 2.2 billion kronor ().

Although it works out to about 1650 kronor a year, there won’t be much to it if the gas tax is raised, as is expected to happen. Living in the country means needing a vehicle, especially when the state’s services are few and far between. The tax reduction might then cover the cost of filling the tank a time or two. Only voters can decide if the trade off is a fair one.

3 sep. – Torell trial

pic: black ribbon publicdomainvectors.org

Trial began today in a tragic case of police shooting. For those who weren’t around, 20-year old Eric Torell was shot to death by three police responding to a middle-of-the-night call about an armed gunman. Eric Torell was autistic and had Downs syndrome. He was holding a plastic shotgun, and was shot at 25 times, of which three bullets hit him.

According to the prosecution, the first shots could be considered self-defense because the plastic weapon could easily be mistaken for an actual gun. However, Eric Torell was clearly turning in or after those first seconds, and two bullets hit him in the back. Those bullets, say the prosecutor, were not self-defense. The court will have to decide if, in that brief interval, the police ought to have stopped and are therefore guilty as charged.

The officer who hit Torell in the back is charged with misconduct, and the police whose bullet was the killing shot is charged with involuntary manslaughter. The officer in charge of the response is charged with misconduct as well, in that the police response was poorly led. All three officers are pleading innocent. That shots were fired at all, or that the victim had an intellectual disability is not relevant to the case at hand. Instead, the case centers on how the police understood the situation and if their actions were motivated (bit.ly/SvDTorell1).

Whatever the outcome, there is no happy ending to this story, nothing that will change the events of that August night. Perhaps the best that can be decided is a clearer understanding of responsibilities – on the part of the police, and, on the part of the general public.

2 sep. – you can’t come

Minister of Home Affairs Mikael Damberg responded positively yesterday to Moderate Party leader Ulf Kristersson’s top ten list of things he thinks should be done at the government level to combat rising crime (see yesterday’s post). It was time, Damberg opened, to gather round and talk. So far so good. But then, Damberg said that everyone was invited to the party – everyone except the party called the Sweden Democrats.

“Here we go again” commented former Christian Democratic party leader Göran Hägglund in response. “No political issue is important enough to be discussed on its own merits. Instead, the debate is about how to handle SD” he tweeted.

The Christian Democrats, now led by Ebba Busch Thor, were glad of the invite and the reason behind it, but rejected Damberg’s rejection. As did the Moderate Party somewhat later. Via Facebook, Kristersson wrote that one can’t say that you’re getting all the parties together on this issue, and then “exclude the representatives of over 17% of voters – voters who are just as vulnerable and worried about crime as everyone else in Sweden” (expressen.se).

But Damberg is sticking to his guns, so to speak. The Sweden Democrats, he says, have a different set of fundamental values (värdegrunder). They also have, he adds, a very “shallow explanation model” – read: the same explanation for all things. To what might Damberg so coquettishly be referring? Immigration. And yes, it must be said, that no matter how the Sweden Democrats frame something, the real meaning is usually that Sweden’s problems are due to people from other countries, and them being in this country.

The rising crime question is serious to many people though, and Damberg could do worse than allowing SD a chance to be the nazis that he basically thinks they are. But as a science-loving country, it can also be noted that the most wonderful cures can come from the nastiest poisons.

1 sep. – Kristersson’s top ten list

In advance of his “summer speech,” Moderate Party leader Ulf Kristersson has sent 10 suggestions to combat crime that the Moderate Party is willing to support and cooperate on to Prime Minister, and Social Democrat party leader, Stefan Löfven. Although the text isn’t public yet, several points have leaked, including a proposal to allow court witnesses to be anonymous.

Anonymous witnesses has been a recurring debate over the past couple years, as crime has risen and the number of people willing to witness, in particular in connection with gang violence, has decreased to near zero levels. Witnesses have been threatened into staying quiet, have been assaulted, and even murdered. A change of this magnitude in the Swedish court system would be difficult to get through, but already last April the government started an investigation into seeing if it would be possible under Swedish constitutional law: There are many that believe it isn’t. One country that Sweden could look at as an example is Norway, where anonymous witnesses are allowed.

SvD reports that Kristersson’s list also contains a suggestion for making it easy, and legal, for police to carry out body searches, in certain zones only, if the person is suspected, for example, of carrying an illegal weapon. No concrete suspicion must be presented for a body search to take place. The suggestion list is also said to include lowering the threshold for requiring the police to take someone into custody, and doubling the sentence of any gang member that is convicted of committing a crime. According to Kristersson, the increase in violent crime is something that requires just a broad mobilisation, and presumably some stiff law-making.

So far there has been no answer from Löfven, which is natural since perhaps it isn’t considered so seemly for the Prime Minister to jump when Kristersson says so. Kristersson says he expects an answer though: “Either he’s ready to make changes and lead the country out of this crisis, or he’s not.” “In the end,” Kristersson finished, “you have to lead the country or leave the job.”