DistantNews
Support us

Max Hjelm: What Gunnar Strömmer said in the migration debate simply is not true

From Dagens Nyheter · () Swedish

Translated from Swedish and summarized by DistantNews. Read the original for the full story.

At a glance

Opinion Named sources Context piece
  • The editorial argues that the government avoided discussing the deportation policies associated with its electoral alliance during an Agenda migration debate.
  • It says the debate focused less on the number of refugees Sweden should accept than on whether people already in Sweden should be allowed to stay.
  • The article frames the 2026 election choice as one between migration policy combined with integration and mass deportations alongside entrenched segregation.

Moderate Party politician Gunnar Strömmer said during SVT’s Agenda migration debate that “everyone” in the studio and in Swedish society recognized the problems with deporting teenagers and wanted to stop it. That is simply not true, argues Dagens Nyheter columnist Max Hjelm.

everyone

· Gunnar Strömmer, Moderate Party politicianStrömmer used the word during the Agenda debate when claiming that people in the studio and Swedish society wanted to stop teenage deportations.

The debate did not center primarily on how many refugees Sweden should protect. Instead, it turned on whether people who have already arrived should be allowed to remain. The government was put on the defensive, Hjelm writes, and tried to wave away the policies the Tidö parties are actually taking into the election.

Hjelm points to the debate over teenage deportations. When the issue reached the political agenda early in the year, the Moderates acted only after Sweden Democrats leader Jimmie Åkesson approved moving the discussion out of the way before the election, the article says. In June, the Tidö parties presented what Hjelm calls a half-measure: young people could stay until age 21 before facing deportation. Sweden Democrats migration spokesman Ludvig Aspling said, “Had it been an SD government, there perhaps would not have been any safety valve.”

Had it been an SD government, there perhaps would not have been any safety valve.

· Ludvig Aspling, Sweden Democrats migration policy spokesmanAspling commented on the Tidö parties’ measure allowing young people to remain until age 21 before risking deportation.

The column also highlights the Sweden Democrats’ proposal to retroactively withdraw permanent residence permits, potentially affecting hundreds of thousands of people who have often lived in Sweden for a long time. The Moderates and Liberals said in the debate that they opposed the proposal. Yet Prime Minister Ulf Kristersson has called it “natural” for the Sweden Democrats to take responsibility for immigration in a future Tidö government. Hjelm argues that the party’s intentions for such a role are clear.

natural

· Ulf Kristersson, Swedish prime minister and Moderate Party leaderKristersson described it as natural for the Sweden Democrats to take responsibility for immigration in a future Tidö government.

Kristersson says a second Tidö term would focus on integration rather than migration. Hjelm considers that unlikely, noting that Kristersson has also said the Sweden Democrats should take responsibility for integration. The party leader Jimmie Åkesson wants to “spend exactly zero kronor on integration,” according to the column. Hjelm concludes that the central political divide is now between migration combined with integration, and mass deportations with firmly established segregation.

spend exactly zero kronor on integration

· Jimmie Åkesson, Sweden Democrats leaderÅkesson’s statement is cited to illustrate the column’s argument that the Sweden Democrats would not pursue an active integration policy.
About this summary

Originally published by Dagens Nyheter in Swedish. Translated, summarized, and contextualized automatically by DistantNews, with a note on how the source frames the story. Not individually reviewed before publishing. How this works.