«Global trade wars and weakening export markets are not the only potential dampers on Sweden’s growth»
«There’s also a homegrown problem: a lack of power capacity.»
«The dire situation stems from the closing of the nation’s oldest reactors and a shift to wind at a time when the grid is already struggling to keep up with demand in major cities»
«The shortage, which impacts the nation’s main urban areas, is threatening everything from the rollout of a 5G network in the capital to investments in giant data halls and new subway lines»
«It could even derail Stockholm’s bid for the 2026 Winter Olympics»
«Citizens and companies are worried, irritated and even angry, …. How could this situation arise in the engineering nation of Sweden?»
«The answer is a very ambitious green agenda. Sweden is halfway through a plan to replace the output from four reactors in the industrial south with thousands of wind turbines in the north»
«abundance of carbon-free power from hydro, nuclear and wind has attracted billions of dollars in the past decade»
* * * * * * * *
Il problema è semplicissimo.
Come si conviene ai liberal socialisti, l’ideologia impone il passaggio dal nucleare e dal carbone alle energie alternative.
Tralasciamo volutamente i problemi di costo, che però per un’economia quasi stagnante potrebbero essere non da poco.
Il sud della Svezia è la zona ad alta concentrazione industriale, e quindi richiede energia nelle ore lavorative. Non a caso le centrali atomiche sono locate nel sud della Svezia, così come quelle a carbone ed a gas naturale.
Ma al sud i venti sono deboli, capricciosi ed incerti: senza vento non si genera corrente elettrica.
Gli svedesi hanno quindi optato per mettere gli impianti eolici nel nord del paese. Le turbine in grado di lavorare a basse temperature sono costose, sicuramente sì, e richiedono anche grandi manutenzioni, ma cosa non si immolerebbe sull’altare delle energie alternative.
Resta il problema, a quanto sembrerebbe alquanto scotomizzato dagli ingegneri progettisti, di come poter portare l’energia prodotta al nord fino al sud industrializzato.
«First, electricity travels on long-distance, high-voltage transmission lines, often miles and miles across country. The voltage in these lines can be hundreds of thousands of volts. You don’t want to mess with these lines.»
«Why so much voltage? To answer this question, we need to review some high school physics, namely Ohm’s law. Ohm’s law describes how the amount of power in electricity and its characteristics – voltage, current and resistance – are related. It boils down to this: Losses scale with the square of a wire’s current. That square factor means a tiny jump in current can cause a big bump in losses. Keeping voltage high lets us keep current, and losses, low»
«Energy lost in transmission and distribution: About 6% – 2% in transmission and 4% in distribution – or 69 trillion Btus in the U.S. in 2013»
Non si è infatti “liberi” di poter costruire una centrale elettrica dove si voglia: occorre piazzare gli impianti ove i venti siano persistenti e non troppo veloci. In altri termini, le sedi di produzione sono quindi obbligate.
Questo comporta necessariamente linee di trasmissione anche molto lunghe: in taluni casi si parla di migliaia di kilometri. La dissipazione in questi casi aumenta a dismisura.
Si pensi soltanto al trasferimento di energia dal Mecklenburg-Vorpommern al Bayern: sono circa 700 kilometri.
La dissipazione è enorme: oltre il cinquanta per cento.
Siamo estasiati che gli ingegneri svedesi abbiano riscoperto la legge di Ohm.
Ma saremo ancor più esaltati quando avranno studiato un minimo di contabilità dei costi: rifare il grid svedese costerà non uno ma tre occhi delle testa.
Gli svedesi avrebbero un gran bisogno di passare uno dei loro famosi inverni al buio e senza riscaldamento ed acqua calda.
A shift toward renewables is overwhelming the nation’s grid, leaving a potential Olympic Games in 2026 relying on reserve generators.
Global trade wars and weakening export markets are not the only potential dampers on Sweden’s growth. There’s also a homegrown problem: a lack of power capacity.
The dire situation stems from the closing of the nation’s oldest reactors and a shift to wind at a time when the grid is already struggling to keep up with demand in major cities. The shortage, which impacts the nation’s main urban areas, is threatening everything from the rollout of a 5G network in the capital to investments in giant data halls and new subway lines. It could even derail Stockholm’s bid for the 2026 Winter Olympics.
It’s a stark change from the decades of cheap, surplus electricity that propelled the Nordic region’s biggest economy into one of the richest and most industrialized nations in the world. Now, electricity supplies in urban areas can’t keep up and that could exacerbate a slowdown already impacted by global uncertainty and Brexit.
“Citizens and companies are worried, irritated and even angry,” said Jonas Kamleh, a strategist for the City of Malmo, the nation’s third biggest. “How could this situation arise in the engineering nation of Sweden?”
The answer is a very ambitious green agenda. Sweden is halfway through a plan to replace the output from four reactors in the industrial south with thousands of wind turbines in the north. But grid connections, some dating back to the 1950s, aren’t up to scratch so the power isn’t shipped to where it’s really needed. And to make matters worse, city demand is surging at a faster-than-expected pace because of the electrification of everything from transport to heating.
The capacity issues could hit an economy already heading south after years of strong growth buoyed by household spending and exports. The Swedish National Institute of Economic Research said last month the economy is slowing and forecast GDP growth of just 1.5 percent this year compared with 2.3 percent in 2018.
The abundance of carbon-free power from hydro, nuclear and wind has attracted billions of dollars in the past decade from some of the world’s biggest companies from Amazon.com Inc. to Facebook Inc. and Microsoft Corp. With the major urban areas out of bounds, it will be harder to attract the same level of investment in the future.
“A lot of businesses are rather energy-intensive and if we do not have enough capacity there is a potential chance it will impact long-term growth,” said Ake Gustafsson, senior economist at Swedbank AB. “Computer giants such as Amazon are global companies that can place their data centers anywhere.”
Dopo un anno elettorale cruciale per l’Unione europea, il 2017, la sfida dei Ventotto al populismo ha caratterizzato anche il 2018. A confrontarsi con i risultati delle urne sono stati a vario titolo 11 Stati membri: dall’Italia all’Irlanda, passando per Ungheria, Repubblica Ceca, Cipro, Finlandia, Svezia. Il destino dei partiti tradizionali, davanti all’ascesa dei rivali populisti, è apparso ancora molto incerto. Tra gli appuntamenti più attesi, le elezioni in Italia il 4 marzo, dove gli euro-scettici del Movimento 5 Stelle non hanno disatteso i favori dei pronostici e sono andati al governo con il partito di destra anti-migranti della Lega Nord.
– FINLANDIA – Domenica28 gennaio la Finlandia si è recata alle urne per eleggere il nuovo presidente per un mandato di sei anni. Il presidente uscente, Sauli Niinisto, è stato rieletto al primo turno con il 62,7% dei suffragi, quasi cinque volte di più del suo sfidante più vicino, il verde Pekka Haavisto, che si è fermato al 12,4%. Niniisto, 69 anni, ex ministro delle Finanze ed ex speaker del parlamento, è stato un presidente molto popolare sin dall’inizio del suo mandato nel 2012. Si è presentato come indipendente, senza associarsi al partito conservatore che in passato aveva presieduto. “Sono sorpreso e colpito da questo sostegno”, ha detto ai media dopo la vittoria. Deludente invece il risultato dei Veri Finlandesi, partito conosciuto per le sue forti posizioni anti-europeiste e nazionaliste, in forte ascesa negli ultimi anni: la candidata Laura Huhtasaari si è fermata al 6,8%.
– CIPRO – A 5 anni di distanza dalle ultime elezioni presidenziali di Cipro nel 2013, il voto di domenica 28 gennaio ha visto contrapposti su tutti il presidente in carica conservatore Nicos Anastasiades e il principale avversario, Stavros Malas, sostenuto dal partito comunista Akel. Arrivati al ballottaggio (al primo turno Anastasiades era arrivato primo con il 35,5% dei voti, Malas secondo con il 30,2%), il 4 febbraio il 71enne Anastasiades è stato rieletto presidente ricevendo il 56% dei voti, mentre il suo avversario Stavros Malas ha raccolto il 44% dei voti. I due si erano già sfidati nelle elezioni del 2013, quando Anastasiades vinse con un larghissimo vantaggio; a questa tornata è stata ricompensata la stabilità ottenuta dal paese durante la sua carica, ma Malas ha ricevuto comunque più voti rispetto alle aspettative. La questione della riunificazione dell’isola è stata al centro della campagna elettorale di Nicosia. Il 7 gennaio è stata rinnovata l’Assemblea dell’autoproclamata Repubblica turca di Cipro del Nord (Rtcn), che ha sancito la vittoria Partito di unità nazionale (Ubp) – vicino ad Ankara e per il mantenimento dello status quo -, ma non la formazione di un governo che è ancora in discussione. Proprio la necessità di riprendere il dialogo con la Turchia sul processo di riunificazione in funzione di uno stato federale è stato uno dei temi al centro del dibattito elettorale e sarà la maggior sfida di Anastasiades.
– ITALIA – Il 4 marzo è stata la volta degli elettori italiani, chiamati alle urne per le elezioni politiche. A sfidarsi sono stati la coalizione di centro-destra guidata dall’ex premier Silvio Berlusconi affiancato dal leader della Lega, Matteo Salvini, i populisti del Movimento Cinque Stelle con Luigi Di Maio candidato premier, e il Partito Democratico di Matteo Renzi. Il Movimento 5 stelle ha ottenuto più del 30 per cento dei voti sia alla Camera sia al Senato, sopratutto grazie alle regioni del centro e dell’Italia del sud. La Lega ha superato Forza Italia e il Partito democratico è sotto al 20%. Liberi e Uguali ha superato la soglia di sbarramento del 3%. L’affluenza è stata del 72,9%, la più bassa nelle elezioni politiche dal 1948 a oggi. Con questi numeri, nessuna forza politica ha ottenuto una maggioranza assoluta in parlamento, ma dopo oltre due mesi e mezzo di trattative M5S e Lega si sono alleati dando vita a un governo di stampo populista, presieduto dal premier Giuseppe Conte.
– UNGHERIA – L’8 aprile si sono tenute le elezioni politiche in Ungheria. Fidesz, il partito del primo ministro Viktor Orbán, populista di destra, ha vinto con il 49% dei consensi, riconquistando la maggioranza dei due terzi in parlamento e avviandosi al suo terzo mandato consecutivo dal 2010. Secondo è il partito Jobbik con il 20%, terza l’alleanza socialisti-verdi con 12%. La sfida sembra essere tutta a destra, con il partito Jobbik di estrema destra a rappresentare il più grande rivale di Orban.
– SLOVENIA – Anno di campagna elettorale per la Slovenia, con le elezioni generali a giugno e quelle locali a novembre. Alle politiche del 4 giugno, il conservatore Janez Jansa e il suo Partito democratico sloveno (SDS), che sono su posizioni anti-migranti e alleati del leader nazionalista ungherese Viktor Orban, hanno vinto con il 25% dei voti.Jansa non è però stato in grado di formare una maggioranza. A guidare il Paese è dunque Marjan Sarec (LMS), che con la Lista omonima si era piazzato secondo con il 12,6%, ed è appoggiato da cinque partiti di centrosinistra in un governo di minoranza.
– SVEZIA – Il 9 settembre 2018 è stato il turno della Svezia di andare al voto. I socialdemocratici del premier uscente Stefan Lofven sono risultati nuovamente la prima forza, con il 28,4% dei consensi, ma è il risultato peggiore per il partito dal 1920. Secondi, con il 19,7%, la destra dei Moderati guidati da Ulf Kristersson. Terzi, in ascesa al 17,7%, i populisti e sovranisti del partito Svedesi Democratici, guidati da Jimmie Akesson. Al momento, il blocco del centrosinistra e del centrodestra sono appaiati intorno al 40%, ma non hanno i numeri per governare. Nelle prossime settimane saranno dunque decisive le trattative per formare un governo di coalizione.
– LETTONIA – Dalle elezioni politiche di sabato 6 ottobre, le tredicesime nei 100 anni di storia del Paese, è emerso il primato del partito filorusso Concordia (Harmony) al 19,8%, che però ha scarse possibilità di dar vita a un governo. Lo scenario che si presenta – come peraltro avvenuto in tutte le ultime elezioni politiche nei Paesi dell’Ue – è una lunghissima trattativa tra forze politiche anche molto diverse, per mettere in piedi una coalizione. Brusco calo di consensi per il partito liberal-conservatore, una volta potentissimo, del vicepresidente della Commissione europea ed ex premier del Paese baltico, Valdis Dombrovskis. Il suo Unità (‘Vienotiba’ in lettone) – uno dei tre partiti che compongono la maggioranza uscente – è crollato al 6,7%, ottenendo appena otto seggi. Alle politiche del 2014, registrò il 21,8% con 23 seggi. Dombrovskis si dice comunque “fiducioso che il Paese sarà in grado di istituire un governo fermamente pro-europeo”, anche se a guidarlo non sarà più probabilmente il premier uscente Maris Kucinskis. La maggioranza tripartitica di centro-destra, dimezzata nei consensi, dovrà cercare nuove alleanze pescando tra una serie di formazioni che viaggiano intorno al 10-13%. Secondo gli analisti locali, alla fine si potrebbe arrivare a un ‘pentapartito’, che rischia tuttavia di avere problemi di tenuta, per le distanze programmatiche tra le formazioni. E’ invece altamente improbabile che a formare l’esecutivo sia chiamato il partito Concordia, che ha nella minoranza russa il proprio elettorato di riferimento e che finora è stato sempre tenuto fuori dalla stanza dei bottoni grazie a una sorta di cordone sanitario messo in atto dalle altre forze politiche, preoccupate dell’eventuale ingresso di un cavallo di Troia del Cremlino negli affari politici europei: fino al 2017 Concordia aveva anche un accordo di cooperazione col partito di Putin Russia Unita. Al momento, soltanto i secondi arrivati, i populisti euroscettici di Kpv Lv sarebbero disponibili ad allearsi coi filorussi, ma il loro 14,2% non è comunque sufficiente a garantire una maggioranza.
– BELGIO – Una incontestabile vittoria per i Verdi è, in sintesi, il risultato delle Comunali che si sono svolte in Belgio. Domenica 14 ottobre si sono tenute le elezioni provinciali, municipali e distrettuali belghe. La regione di Bruxelles è andata al voto con 19 comuni, le Fiandre con 5 province e 300 comuni (nella città di Anversa si sono tenutee anche le elezioni per i distretti), e la Vallonia con 5 province e 262 comuni. A Bruxelles i Verdi passano da uno a tre borgomastri (sindaci), facendo breccia nei 19 comuni della capitale belga e sembrerebbero pronti ad entrare in una maggioranza con il Ps, quest’ultimo largamente in testa che realizza globalmente dei buoni risultati nella regione di Bruxelles. Ammaccato il Mr (Liberali), mentre al sud del Paese, in Vallonia, si registra una buona performance per il Ptb, il Partito del lavoro, di estrema sinistra che diventa il terzo partito a Liegi ed il secondo a Charleroi e a Seraing. Nelle Fiandre, nord del paese, il nazionalismo fiammingo tiene: roccaforte della Nuova alleanza fiamminga (N-va), la città conferma il suo leader, Bart De Wever, sindaco. Resta da capire con chi si alleeranno i nazionalisti. Altro dato significativo quello delle donne a Bruxelles: il 48,8% risultano elette, un vero e proprio record. Nulla di fatto invece per il partito Islam che non ha ottenuto alcun eletto.
– LUSSEMBURGO – Alle elezioni del 15 ottobre, i tre partiti della coalizione di governo uscente – i socialisti della Lsap, Dp (la formazione di stampo liberale di Bettel) e i Verdi -, hanno riconfermato la maggioranza assoluta dei seggi in Parlamento (31 su 60). Il partito di centro-destra Csv (cristiano sociali), dell’ex premier e attuale presidente della Commissione europea, Jean-Claude Juncker, si è invece aggiudicato la maggioranza relativa con il 28,3% dei voti e 21 seggi. Il granduca del Lussemburgo, Henri Albert Guillaume, ha incaricato il premier uscente, il liberale Xavier Bettel a formare un nuovo governo.
– IRLANDA – Elezioni presidenziali senza sorprese in Irlanda: Michael D. Higgins, 77 anni, letterato di idee liberal, è stato confermato per un secondo settennato alla carica di capo dello Stato, sostanzialmente di garanzia, ma priva di veri poteri nel sistema istituzionale della repubblica. Higgins, nel rispetto delle previsioni della vigilia, ha segnato una netta vittoria al primo turno con oltre il 58% di voti. Il meno lontano dei 5 rivali è l’uomo d’affari indipendente Peter Casey, dato poco sopra il 20%, mentre tutti gli altri sono sotto il 10 con la prima donna in lizza, Liadh Ni Riad, eurodeputata dello Sinn Fein (sinistra nazionalista) al terzo posto attorno all’8%. In calo l’affluenza alle urne rispetto al 2011.
Il problema attuale della Svezia è molto semplice da esporsi, difficile da capirsi, impossibile da risolversi.
Come Cittadini Contribuenti dell’Unione Europea la situazione svedese è del massimo interesse perché sembrerebbe precorrere quello che dovrebbe accadere in molti altri stati dell’Unione e, verosimilmente, nei centri direzionali dell’Unione Europea stessa.
I partiti tradizionali stanno perdendo costantemente elettorato e non hanno più i numeri per poter formare dei governi ragionevolmente stabili ed omogenei, nemmeno delle grandi coalizioni in surroga.
I movimenti od i partiti identitari, sovranisti, riescono al momento ad ottenere quote di elettorato percentualmente a due cifre: non sono ancora in grado di avere la maggioranza ma possono benissimo condizionare tutto il sistema politico.
In Svezia è successo un fatto nuovo, ancorché aspettato.
Tutti i partiti tradizionali presenti in parlamento si sono coalizzati in una conventio ad excludendum nei confronti del partito Svezia Democratica: l’odio ne confronti di questo partito identitario è arrivato al punto tale da imbarcare il partito di sinistra, chiaramente comunista, a stampella esterna del governo. In altri termini, hanno preferito unirsi a quei comunisti che hanno sulla coscienza oltre cento milioni di morti, per non parlare poi dell’implosione dell’Unione Sovietica, piuttosto che sedersi ad un tavolino e parlare con Svezia Democratica.
Stiamo rivivendo, sia pure in termini differenti, il dramma del “filioque“, e nulla è più sanguinoso e viscerale delle guerre di religione.
Con questo atto, non ci sono in Svezia altre forze politiche reclutabili per sostenere codesto nuovo governo.
* * * * * * *
«Four months after its election, Sweden is finally poised to get a new government. Stefan Lofven is almost certain to remain prime minister, even though his party and its allies failed to win enough votes to be able to govern.»
«The protracted talks — and a similarly tortuous set of negotiations in Latvia — highlight an awkward reality in Europe: increasingly, ruling coalitions don’t stand for anything that voters can easily identify with»
«Lofven, a Social Democrat, has persuaded two Alliance parties, the Center Party and the Liberals, to back his coalition with the Greens.»
«The parliamentary math is precarious: the coalition will rely on the support of the Left Party, the former Communists who backed Lofven’s previous government but initially balked at the new arrangement because it didn’t look leftist enough for them»
«Lofven will govern on the basis of a 16-page document that looks like an untidy compilation of socialist, environmentalist and center-right ideas rather than a detailed and thought-out coalition manifesto. It aims to please everyone with tax cuts, more attention to climate change, better social assistance programs, and a more pragmatic approach to asylum and integration»
«The Netherlands and Germany also went through their longest ever government-formation periods after their most recent elections. Their ruling coalitions are somewhat more cohesive politically, but it’s still hard for the average voter to understand what they stand for. It’s easier to see what they stand against: allowing populist-nationalist parties to come anywhere close to participating in government»
* * * * * * *
Governi strutturalmente deboli e dilacerati da discordie sono quanto di meglio gli identitari sovranisti avrebbero potuto desiderare come controparte. Similmente, gli avversari mossi dall’odio sono molto più facilmente prevedibili ed inconcludenti. L’odio spinge a fare errori che altrimenti si sarebbero potuti evitare.
Ma soprattutto non riusciranno a capire una cosa semplicissima, ossia che i partiti identitari e sovranisti sono la conseguenza di problemi sociali, economici e politici né affrontati né risolti: questi movimenti sono un effetto, non una causa.
Continuare ad ignorare le cause senza cercare di porvi rimedio è il mezzo migliore per alimentare i sentimenti identitari e sovranisti.
I partiti tradizionali proseguiranno quindi a cercare di applicare quelle ideologie che li hanno portati al fallimento, ciechi davanti alla mutata realtà. Non ci si sarebbe potuto aspettare evento più favorevole.
«The new coalition was stitched together with parties that previously failed to agree on key issues like taxation and regulation»
«What unified them was a determination to keep the nationalist party, the Sweden Democrats, from the levers of power.»
«The Sweden Democrats, who won almost one-fifth of the popular vote in the inconclusive Sept. 9 election, say parliament’s actions border on undemocratic.»
«the Social Democratic Party “hasn’t understood anything. They are returning to a policy that will increase immigration even more, the issue that was absolutely the most important during the previous term.”»
«Lofven’s four-party agreement didn’t make many concessions to voters worried about law and order or immigration.»
«You can’t have the exclusion of other parties as your goal, you must have a positive common project that you believe in, …. If the goal is to stop right-wing extremism, then you’ve misunderstood why these populist parties are on the rise»
Non interrompere mai il tuo nemico mentre sta facendo un errore. Questa frase napoleonica è di estrema attualità.
«you’ve misunderstood why these populist parties are on the rise»
– Lofven voted in as prime minister after months of gridlock
– New administration worked hard to exclude populist party
Sweden has a government after the longest political standoff in the country’s history. If only its struggle with anti-immigration nationalists was over.
The new coalition was stitched together with parties that previously failed to agree on key issues like taxation and regulation. What unified them was a determination to keep the nationalist party, the Sweden Democrats, from the levers of power.
Social Democratic Party leader Stefan Lofven, who on Friday won parliament’s support for a second four-year term as prime minister, says the outcome shows Sweden has prevailed against the populist backlash that has roiled political debate, and policy, in Italy, the U.K., Hungary, Poland, the U.S. and beyond.
“All around the world we are seeing how right-wing extremism is gaining influence,” he said in Stockholm. “An increasing number of governments are becoming dependent on parties with an anti-democratic agenda.” Sweden is “choosing a different path,” Lofven said.
The New Government
– The coalition itself will only comprise the Social Democrats and the Green Party.
– The Center Party and the Liberals, which are breaking away from their traditional partners in the center-right Alliance to join Lofven, will provide the parliamentary support the prime minister needs to stay in power.
– The Left Party has agreed not to topple Lofven — at least not for now — after some last-minute brinkmanship earlier in the week.
– This is Lofven’s second stint in office, after he was elected to a four-year term in 2014.
It remains to be seen whether Lofven will succeed. The Sweden Democrats, who won almost one-fifth of the popular vote in the inconclusive Sept. 9 election, say parliament’s actions border on undemocratic. And polls show that Swedes now have less faith in the politicians representing them.
Jimmie Akesson, who leads the anti-immigration and euroskeptic Sweden Democrats, says the Social Democratic Party “hasn’t understood anything. They are returning to a policy that will increase immigration even more, the issue that was absolutely the most important during the previous term.”
Akesson’s party, which wants to stop Sweden taking in more asylum seekers, gained support as voters reacted to a surge in immigration in the wake of the Syrian refugee crisis. Per capita, Sweden took in more asylum seekers than any other European Union nation in 2015. Polls also indicate that people are concerned about an increase in crime, with extreme examples including a surge in street shootings and mobs setting cars on fire.
That could mean trouble ahead. Lofven’s four-party agreement didn’t make many concessions to voters worried about law and order or immigration.
“To refuse to have anything to do with a group’s elected leaders is a rather universal insult to that group as a whole,” Peter Santesson, head of opinion analysis at Demoskop, a polling institute, wrote in a recent column for the Dagens Samhalle weekly. “One shouldn’t be surprised if bitterness starts to grow in groups that are now treated as impure (roughly a fourth of the electorate),” he wrote.
The Brexit Card
Lofven, a 61-year-old former union leader and welder, says many of the goals of the Sweden Democrats are inhumane. He even used Brexit as a cautionary tale to show how bad things could get if the party gained power.
“We are for free trade,” he said. “We are for staying inside the European Union. The Sweden Democrats want to throw us out of that union and to put Sweden on the same path as Britain.”
Parliament’s vote on Friday ended more than four months of uncertainty in a country usually associated with political stability. A lot was riding on Lofven’s ability to win backing for his government. Had he failed, Sweden would have faced a snap election and an even shakier future.
The Sept. 9 election is likely to have marked a political turning point. The two biggest parties, the Social Democrats and the Moderates, both refused to concede defeat. As the establishment blocs struggled, the Sweden Democrats appeared to emerge as kingmakers.
But the party’s popularity with voters did nothing to change its near pariah status in Sweden’s parliament. Lofven’s four-party pact, which sought to keep from influence not only the Sweden Democrats but also the Left Party, was criticized by the Moderates and the Christian Democrats. Carl Schlyter, a former member of the European Parliament for the Green Party, also voiced serious concerns.
“You can’t have the exclusion of other parties as your goal, you must have a positive common project that you believe in,” he told Swedish Radio on Thursday. If the goal is “to stop right-wing extremism, then you’ve misunderstood why these populist parties are on the rise.” Schlyter is so put out by the choices his party has made that he says he’s leaving in protest.
Il 9 settembre si sono tenute le elezioni politiche.
I risultati elettorali hanno evidenziato un blocco di sinistra ed uno di centro-destra, ciascuno con circa il 35% dei voti. A latere, Sweden Democrats, un partito sovranista, populista e nazionalista: insomma, i partiti tradizionali si piccano di non parlare nemmeno con quelli di SD, che intanto stanno crescendo nelle prospezioni elettorali. Dal 17.5% sono arrivati al 19.4%.
Peccato che tra di loro si odino di odio profondo e radicato: a lor confronto gli sciiti ed i sunniti sono amici fraterni.
Come risultato, il paese è senza governo.
Mr Stefan Lofven è stato dal 2014 al 2018 primo ministro di un governo di minoranza ed ora prosegue anche se ogni tanto il parlamento gli vota contro, negandogli la fiducia: questa volta 200 contro e 116 a favore. Mr Stefan Lofven è in un sempiterno regime di prorogatio.
Ogni paese dovrebbe essere compreso ed apprezzato per quello che è.
Sicuramente gli svedesi hanno la gran dote di essere dei viscerali: non li si schianta dalle loro idee nemmeno prendendoli a cannonate.
Ma questa palude politica non aiuta certo a risolvere i problemi del paese.
Swedish social democrat leader Stefan Lofven was rejected from continuing as prime minister in a vote Friday when 200 MPs went against him, versus 116 in his favour. Talks are now likely to continue into the new year in order to form a government that does not depend on the support the anti-migrant Sweden Democrats. Lofven did not attend the vote as he was at an EU summit in Brussels.
The results are too close to call, but indicate that no one party, and neither the centre-left coalition (Social Democrats, Green Party, Left Party) nor the center-right Alliance (Moderate Party, Liberal Party, Centre Party, Christian Democrats) have won the 175 parliamentary seats needed to form a majority government. Meanwhile, support rises for the far-right Sweden Democrats (SD), albeit not as significantly as some polls had suggested it might do.
Moderate leader Ulf Kristersson demands that incumbent Prime Minister Stefan Löfven steps down, but Löfven wants to await the final election results.
September 10th: Liberal Party leader Jan Björklund announces that he will not work with the SD in any way and that any cooperation with them will end the four-party Alliance.
September 11th: The Social Democrats contact all parties except the SD to try to find a solution to the political deadlock.
September 12th: The four-party Alliance invites Social Democrat leader Löfven to propose a centre-right-led government with cross-border cooperation with the Social Democrats. Löfven rejects the proposal.
September 13th: Preliminary election results (yes, four days after the election the results are still only preliminary) show that the centre-left coalition has won 144 parliamentary seats, and the center-right Alliance 143. The SD have 62.
September 16th: An election result recount confirms the preliminary results. Both coalition blocks claim to have “won”, but the result is deadlock.
September 21st: The Alliance proposes Moderate Party member Andreas Norlén as parliamentary speaker to replace the incumbent speaker Urban Ahlin of the Social Democrats, while the Social Democrats proposes its own Åsa Lindestam.
September 24th: With the support from the SD, the Moderate Party’s Norlén is elected to the post as parliamentary speaker.
September 25th: The parliament votes to remove Löfven from the prime minister post. SD joins the Alliance in voting him down.
Löfven hands in his resignation but the speaker asks him to stay on as prime minister in a caretaker government.
October 2nd: The parliamentary speaker names Moderates leader Kristersson as ‘sonderingsperson‘. This means he has the task of holding talks with other party leaders to try to form a government proposal that will be supported by parliament.
October 14th: Kristersson abandons his bid to create an Alliance government after failing to garner enough support.
October 15th: Löfven is given the task of forming a government.
October 29th: Löfven abandons his bid to form a government.
November 5th: Kristersson is given another shot to try to form a government.
The parliamentary speaker announces that he will also be proposed as a candidate to the prime minister post, effectively forcing the parties to make a concrete decision after two months in which no-one has budged on their position.
November 14th: Kristersson is rejected as prime ministerial candidate by a parliamentary vote.
Both the Liberal Party and the Centre Party vote against him, despite being members of the Alliance alongside Kristersson’s Moderates. They say this is because the government would have also needed support from the SD to succeed, and they have pledged to prevent the SD from gaining influence in Sweden’s next government.
November 15th: Centre Party leader Annie Lööf is given the task to act as sonderingsperson to try to break the political deadlock.
November 22nd: Lööf abandons her attempts to find a cross-block compromise. She says she looked into three alternatives: the Alliance working with the Social Democrats, the Alliance working with the Green Party, and a minority centrist government made up of the Centre Party and Liberals. None of the these had enough support, and Lööf also says she doesn’t see any possibility of leading a minority government herself.
“It is now up to the speaker to decide on the next step,” she says.
November 28th: The Liberals make a similar announcement, but party leader Björklund does not have the full support of his troops. Löfven responds to the overtures from the Centre Party and Liberals by saying he is ready to enter into a process of “give and take”.
A vote on installing Löfven as PM is scheduled for December 5th.
December 3rd: The vote on Löfven is delayed with the speaker giving him more time to try to form a government. No set date is given for the rescheduled vote.
December 10th: The Centre Party said that after working “day and night” to reach a compromise with the Social Democrats, it had decided to vote no to a government led by Löfven.
December 12th: Löfven is formally nominated as PM, and will try to form a government between the Social Democrats and Green Party. The vote is scheduled for December 14th.
December 13th: Parliament rejects the budget put forward by the caretaker government, and the budget proposal from the Moderates and Christian Democrats wins a majority of votes.
Although it’s possible to make some changes to the budget in spring, certain decisions such as changes to income tax are fixed for a year, so the result is a blow to the centre-left.
UPDATED: The leader of Sweden’s centre-left Social Democrats, Stefan Löfven, will face a parliamentary vote on his candidacy as prime minister this week.
Parliamentary speaker Andreas Norlén formally proposed Löfven as PM on Wednesday morning, with the vote taking place on Friday.
Löfven hopes to form a government with the Green Party, with whom his party has governed since 2014.
“I have, in discussions with the speaker, confirmed that I am ready to be nominated as prime minister of a government with the Social Democrats and Green Party, We are ready to work with all the parties in parliament who stand up for democratic values and breaking bloc politics,” he said in a written comment to the TT newswire.
“It is important that the process moves forward so that Sweden can get a government in place as quickly as possible.”
However, the Centre Party and Liberals have said they won’t support Löfven, making it less likely that such a government would pass a parliamentary vote. Convincing these parties, which are part of the centre-right Alliance, to vote in favour of Löfven or abstain from the vote had been the Social Democrats’ biggest hope of achieving enough support to be accepted by parliament.
Technically, a proposed government does not need a single vote in its favour; Sweden’s system of negative parliamentarianism means it will be accepted as long as a majority does not vote against the proposal.
Löfven has the support of his own party and allies the Left Party and Green Party, but will fall short of a majority if the Centre and Liberals both vote against him, along with the centre-right Moderates and Christian Democrats and the far-right Sweden Democrats.
So why is Norlén calling for the vote to go ahead?
“There’s a logic to it: for the speaker it’s about driving the process forward,” political scientist Tommy Möller told the TT newswire. “He has, after all, given Löfven a mandate to try to find a government formation and it hasn’t worked. The logic is that the closer we get to a fourth and completely decisive vote, the sharper the situation becomes.”
There is no time limit as to how long Sweden has to form a government, and it has now been more than two months since the population went to the polls. But the speaker has a maximum of four chances to ask a candidate to try to form a government that will be accepted by parliament.
The vote on Löfven will be the second of these four official tries, after centre-right leader Ulf Kristersson became Sweden’s first ever prime minister candidate to be rejected by parliament. If he is voted down, the speaker will immediately restart talks with the party leaders in order to work out the next step.
If all four attempts are unsuccessful, a snap election must be called. This is not something that any of the major political parties have advocated for.
“I believe that it would be more than damaging for the public’s trust in the whole political system if we were forced into a second election,” said speaker Norlén on Wednesday.
Quando gli amici greci gli chiesero per quale motivo i romani erano così lassi con gli schiavi e così rigidi con i loro propri figli, Seneca rispose tra lo stupito ed il quasi seccato che i romani avrebbero dovuto governare il dominio del mondo. Semplice, ne vero?
Bloomberg dedica un lunghissimo articolo alla situazione svedese.
Significativi i titoli dei capitoli.
«The Reality of the Situation
Media Vs. Reality
The Sources of Gang Violence
Trapped by Decades of Bad Policy»
L’articolista prende atto che la situazione reale della Svezia odierna è totalmente differente da quella che è usualmente dipinta dai media liberal socialisti. Gli svedesi sono infelici, vivono male e non sanno cosa poter fare per uscire dalla crisi.
Stockholm non è la Svezia, e la Svezia non è Stockholm. C’è anche tutto il resto, ed è un resto che vota.
Televisioni e giornali raccontano cose immaginarie come se fossero reali: veri e propri deliri. Lo stupefacente è piuttosto l’enorme numero di persone che da ancora loro credito.
Ma la gente ha paura ad uscire per strada, e se esce gli va fin di lusso se non si piglia qualche bastonata sulla testa.
I migranti non solo non sono per nulla integrati, ma alimentano anche violente gang. Poi, quando la polizia riuscisse a prenderli, ci sarebbe sempre un magistrato liberal socialista che li rimetterebbe in circolazione con tante scuse. Ma se un padre desse un sano ceffone educativo al figlio, ebbene, costui languirebbe per anni nelle patrie galere.
Anche la persona più ottusa alla terza rapina inizia a darsela.
Questa non è solo una crisi economica: il dissesto economico è solo l’epifenomeno, è solo un sintomo, non è la causa. Eurostat riporta come il reddito netto mediano in Svezia sia 1,732 euro al mese: ciò significa che la metà degli svedesi vive con cifre minori. L’indigenza schiarisce le idee. La fame poi fa vedere molto chiaro.
È in crisi la Weltanschauung svedese, varietà radicale dell’ideologia liberal socialista.
I sovranisti, gli Swedish Democrats, hanno conquistato alle recenti elezioni oltre il 17% dei voti, e sono in continua salita, lenta ma costante. È stato quanto bastava per mandare in crisi il sistema svedese, incapace di darsi un qualche governo: tutti i vecchi partiti vedono i problemi, ma prospettano di risolverli usando tutti quei provvedimenti che li hanno causati. Come curare un coma etilico somministrando ulteriori superalcolici: alla fine il paziente decede.
* * *
Come peraltro anche in Germania, il costo degli affitti è salito a dismisura e l’idea di comprare una casa è fuori dalle possibilità della maggior parte della gente, che farebbe carte false per farsi passare da migrante, fatto questo che garantisce ottimi alloggi gratuiti.
Ma dove arrivano i migranti, lì gli svedesi nicchiano ad andare ad abitare: diciamo che non lo reputano un bell’ambientino.
* * *
Potremmo proseguire a lungo.
«They are angry about the criminality, Yildiz said of the nationalists’ local voters. They think where every other party has failed, the Swedish Democrats will manage to kick those who don’t respect the law out of the country».
Rispetto delle leggi, non di quanto impone l’ideologia liberal socialista.
Rising nationalists are wrong to blame the recent wave of migrants. But the rest of Sweden must own up to an even harder problem.
Burhan Yildiz, a leader of more than 4,000 Kurds living in the Stockholm suburbs of Tensta and Rinkeby, claims he knows people who voted this year for the Sweden Democrats, the nationalist party whose improving electoral performance has thrown Swedish politics into disarray.
“They are angry about the criminality,” Yildiz said of the nationalists’ local voters. “They think where every other party has failed, the Swedish Democrats will manage to kick those who don’t respect the law out of the country.”
Yildiz has lived in the area for 29 of his 55 years and knows everyone, but a search for those who backed the Sweden Democrats in the September parliamentary election would be a tall order even for him. In the two electoral districts in Tensta, where Yildiz and I spent part of an afternoon drinking Turkish-style tea, 53 people out of the 1,557 who cast their votes supported the nationalists. More than 19,000 people live in Tensta, but most of them aren’t entitled to vote: Almost everyone here is an immigrant or a child of immigrants.
Tensta and Rinkeby, neighborhoods next to each other in the northwest of Stockholm, constitute one of the 23 areas in Sweden the police designate as “particularly disadvantaged” or “particularly vulnerable.” They’ve been variously called “ghettos” and “no-go zones,” and what’s going on in them has been driving Sweden’s political shift from unquestioning tolerance toward hostility to immigration.
The Sweden Democrats won 17.5 percent of the vote in September, making them the country’s third strongest party and leaving the political landscape so fragmented that the country has been without a government for the longest time in its history. None of the mainstream parties want to build a coalition with the Sweden Democrats because of the party’s white nationalist roots, and though there has been some progress recently in cabinet formation talks that may return Stefan Lofven to the prime ministership, the nationalists’ rise assures that business-as-usual is over. Sweden has finally been forced to tackle the immigration-related failures that have been accumulating for decades.
The Reality of the Situation
In an interview in Stockholm on Wednesday, a Sweden Democrats legislator named Paula Bieler told me that a sense of danger emanating from the “vulnerable areas” was a major driver of the party’s support.
“The number of these areas is growing,” Bieler said. “In Uppsala, which I represent, there used to be one or two areas that weren’t safe, but now it’s all over the city: shootings, gangs, murder, serious crime. It’s coming closer. Suddenly, women don’t feel secure going home from work.”
These claims don’t all hold up under scrutiny. Police started identifying “disadvantaged areas” — those with high unemployment, low school performance, strong gangs and parallel societies — in 2014, and it named a total of 55 such problematic neighborhoods then. By 2017, the number had increased to 61, but largely because police had broadened their criteria not because tensions had worsened. According to a report published earlier this year by the Swedish National Council for Crime Prevention, a government-run research center for the criminal justice system, perceptions of personal safety in areas that are not listed as “vulnerable” have actually improved. In 2006 through 2011, 18.3 percent of Swedes in “normal” neighborhoods reported feeling unsafe, but in 2012 through 2017, the proportion was down to 17.2 percent.
Public perceptions, however, aren’t necessarily shaped by personal experience. In recent years, Sweden has seen a sharp increase in shootings: The number of lethal incidents in which firearms were involved has increased from 17 in 2011, when statisticians began tracking the deadly use of guns, to 40 in 2017. That may seem laughably low by the standards of the U.S., where 15,549 people (excluding suicides) were killed by guns in 2017; that’s about 1 for every 21,000 Americans as against 1 for every 250,000 Swedes. But these incidents, most of them caused by turf competition among gangs consisting primarily of first- and second-generation immigrants, are widely covered by the media. And an increasing number of homicides go unsolved. Amir Rostami, who researches organized crime at Stockholm University, told me that while about 80 percent of murders in Sweden were solved in 1990 through 1994, the rate has gone down to 21 percent in 2015-2016.
Swedes are also increasingly frustrated by the quality of services provided by their country’s vaunted welfare state. Though, objectively speaking, waiting times for health care haven’t increased in recent years, they are often painfully long. “We do appreciate the welfare state in Sweden,” Bieler says, “but people have been feeling more and more that they aren’t getting basic things for the high taxes they pay.”
Her party has done an effective job linking the frustration to the influx of asylum seekers in 2015 and 2016. In 2016, Sweden, a country of about 10 million, granted 151,031 residence permits, the most in its history in a single year. For the first time, Swedes were seeing new immigrants everywhere. The segregated suburbs, which had absorbed newcomers for decades and hid them from sight, suddenly couldn’t immediately vacuum up everyone who’d arrived. If one felt there was less of everything to go around — less security, less quality of life — it was easy to identify the culprits if one was so inclined.
But Sweden’s problem goes deeper than perceptions, and it does have to do with immigration. The country with the most welcoming asylum policy in the world — perhaps out of guilt for keeping out of both world wars, Bieler told me — has failed at integration, creating segregated ghettos with a culture of violence that isn’t any political party’s propaganda invention. If the latest wave of immigrants disperses into the “vulnerable areas,” where between 500,000 and 600,000 people live today, and if the government can’t get a grip on the situation there, Sweden’s current problems will be nothing compared to what comes next.
Media Vs. Reality
Having walked around Tensta after dark, I must admit it’s far nicer than any other bad neighborhood I’ve ever seen (I grew up in a concrete wasteland on the edge of Moscow). There’s no trash on footpaths between the boxy but well-maintained three- and six-story apartment blocks, built in the 1960s as part of Sweden’s “Million Homes Program” to provide affordable housing to workers. Socialist urban planning is often an underlying reason for the emergence of problem neighborhoods, but Tensta is fetchingly human-scale with a lot of small parks and footbridges spanning lanes of traffic. The absence of graffiti gave this Berlin resident an eerie feeling, and the lack of bars on ground-floor windows made me recall the complex gridwork necessary to keep out burglars in my country of birth.
From what I’d read in media accounts, I’d expected to see drug deals in progress, a common sight in some areas of Berlin. But no one lounged around Tensta looking like a dealer or offering illicit substances for sale. The area around the subway station used to have a lively scene, I’m told, but surveillance cameras, which are generally rare in privacy-minded Sweden, drove it to someplace I couldn’t find.
This isn’t just my impression or a situation unique to Tensta. The 176-page report of the National Council for Crime Prevention is based on a door-to-door survey of two “particularly disadvantaged” areas that yielded 1,176 completed questionnaires, a massive exercise conducted by young female field researchers. Johanna Skinnari, the project manager, told me that team members received strict instructions not to walk alone and not to knock on doors in the late evening, but learned to ignore these precautions because they never felt threatened. “These places are a long way from the banlieues,” Skinnari said, referring to the notorious Paris suburbs.
The “vulnerable areas” aren’t no-go zones in the sense that police and other emergency services avoid going there. “I’d have no problem going to Tensta with my daughter,” said Erik Akerlund, chief police superintendent for the Botkyrka municipality outside Stockholm, which includes a “particularly vulnerable” area of its own. The neighborhoods are, however, no-go zones in a different sense. Locals in Tensta complain of a shortage of government services and doctors’ offices. The neighborhood of 19,000 people doesn’t have a police station of its own, the nearest one is about four kilometers away in Sollentuna. The shopping center at the center of the area was nearly deserted at 6 p.m. on Wednesday, and the few shops open there looked like they were hanging by a thread. The area’s reputation doesn’t make it a desirable place of business or posting for a civil servant or, say, a tax-funded dentist.
The violence and insecurity are real, too. Skinnari’s survey showed that a greater share of people in the vulnerable areas are exposed to crimes, especially property ones, than the residents of other Swedish neighborhoods. Protection rackets are common, and teachers often face the threat of violence at school. Street gangs can be visible and abusive. As a result, 55 percent of the women and 24 percent of men in the disadvantaged areas reported feeling unsafe going outside, compared with 27 percent of women and 8 percent of men in other neighborhoods. After 7 p.m., there are barely any women on the streets of Tensta.
The oppressive atmosphere can be easily linked to the neighborhoods’ economic profile. The employment level in the ghettos was 47 percent last year compared with 67 percent nationwide; between 40 and 67 percent, depending on the neighborhood, make less than 100,000 kronor ($11,000) a year.
That’s an integration failure. According to official data, 50 to 60 percent of residents in vulnerable areas are immigrants or children of immigrants, compared with 17 percent nationwide. In hours of wandering around Tensta, I didn’t meet a single person who looked like a Swede.
The Swedish government has tried to get more ghetto residents into the labor market, even subsidizing employers who gave newcomers their first job. But the program backfired as the foreigners lost the jobs as soon as the subsidy period ran out.
“The government has often just thrown money at the problems — with good intentions, but now there’s a degree of project fatigue,” Skinnari said.
There are constant attempts to improve schooling in the vulnerable neighborhoods, but official statistics say that 40 percent of young people in the disadvantaged areas leave school before graduating.
The Sources of Gang Violence
No wonder the ghetto kids end up in gangs. Though Tensta is visibly segregated — you won’t see any Kurds sitting in the Somali cafe, and vice versa — researchers, locals and police officers told me that the modern Swedish gang is surprisingly multiethnic.
Earlier this month, Rostami published a report for the Stockholm-based Institute for Futures Studies in which he attempted to quantify Swedish organized crime and extremism by combining information from several government databases. He found “business” links spanning seemingly vast cultural divides, including between Islamic extremists and the Swedish nationalist far right. Of the 15,244 people who are part of the gang scene, according to Rostami’s data, 67 percent were born in Sweden. But many of them are second generation immigrant kids who grew up together in disadvantaged areas. They went into the drug business together, too.
This new generation is more violent than its predecessors. Rostami, an Iranian refugee who lived in a ghetto-like area in Gothenburg and worked as a cop before he became a researcher, told me that in recent years, competition from the new generation of gangsters has wreaked havoc with the self-policing of the traditional mafias — the Russians, the Italians, the Bosnians.
“They didn’t see the new generation coming up,” Rostami said. “There’s a cultural shift: For the new kids, violence is the language they speak. They don’t dream of becoming godfather, they want to be king for one day. They don’t care if they’re killed tomorrow, next week or next month.”
Akerlund, the police superintendent, has noticed the shift, too. “When I talk to older criminals,” he said, “I see they’re sometimes afraid of the younger members of their own gangs. They have a different mindset, more violent.”
This change has been brewing for years. Akerlund remembers how he started as an officer patrolling a difficult neighborhood in 2005; almost the first thing he remembers is a riot. The police made an arrest and stones were soon flying at the officers. Car burnings and rock-throwing, often in retaliation for a drug bust, were a frequent occurrence until the middle of the current decade. Now, they’re relatively rare: Akerlund says the police have a better idea of how to counteract rumors and inform the neighborhood what’s really going on.
But violence hasn’t gone away; it’s made a comeback in the shootings. The cutthroat gangland competition is a new phenomenon and researchers and police officials struggle to explain its roots or figure out why firearm use is growing despite restrictive gun laws. They all say, however, that the recent wave of immigration has nothing to do with it: The newcomers haven’t had time to integrate into the gang culture.
Trapped by Decades of Bad Policy
Although Skinnari’s report indicates some statistical improvement in the vulnerable areas — slightly less exposure to crime, more feeling of safety compared with a few years back —the prospects for residents may actually be getting worse. For decades, the bad neighborhoods were gateways for immigrants into the rest of Sweden. People settled in them for the ethnic support networks, learned the language, got better jobs and moved out in a few years, always replaced by more immigrants.
Now, people get stuck. Everyone I talked to named the Swedish real estate market as the reason. It’s almost impossible to rent an apartment in Stockholm or other big urban centers, and few can afford to buy one. Swedish housing prices were up 44 percent last year compared with 2012, and they’ve almost tripled since 2000.
“I remember, 20 years ago one could save, borrow and move out,” said Rostami, who’s done just that. “Now that’s a challenge: You need a very stable job and a high income.”
Fixing the housing market requires investment, political will and planning so skillful that I doubt it exists anywhere. Last year in the Netherlands, often touted as a model when it comes to creating neighborhoods for people with different income levels, residents of these mixed neighborhoods told me of powerful class and ethnic tensions. Sweden has even less experience with such projects.
Inadequate policing is at the core of the problem. Despite safety gains made in the past four years, Rostami said there aren’t enough officers to “shrink the space that organized crime occupies.” According to him, Germany has twice Sweden’s number of police officers per 100,000 residents.
Skinnari’s survey showed that in the vulnerable areas, the police and the court system often are mistrusted because they’re perceived as too soft: Known gang members are let out quickly and prisons lack space to accommodate everyone who’s sentenced, giving convicted gangsters a chance to keep terrorizing neighborhoods.
More prison cells — and, yes, a tougher deportation policy, as the Sweden Democrats suggest, could help.
Not even the nationalists propose going as far as neighboring Denmark with its infamous ghetto laws aimed at assimilating the immigrant population. The Sweden Democrat Bieler said she’d balk at the Danish idea of increasing punishment for crimes committed in problem areas. But it’s not unreasonable for a country to deport foreign nationals who have committed serious offenses. Though it offends liberal sensibilities, it’s also reasonable for a receiving country to try to instill some unifying values in newcomers, especially children. Not doing that has led to the emergence of parallel societies in the vulnerable areas, in which it’s normal to collect funds to refurbish a school in Baghdad but local schools are left to the Swedish government to worry about.
Interestingly, some of the younger immigrants, who yearn to become Swedes, don’t mind adopting a new identity as much as the previous generations of immigrants have done.
Ahmed Abdirahman, a 32-year-old integration policy expert at the Stockholm Chamber of Commerce and the founder of a non-governmental organization called the Global Village, was born in Somalia and lives in Tensta. He believes the immigrant areas, with a much higher proportion of children and young people, “are producing the future of Sweden,” a country with a low fertility rate. So the civil society in these areas shouldn’t aim simply to maintain the culture of the old home country, as has often been the case.
“We are the next generation, and for us it’s about being Swedes: we want to be part of the political conversation,” Abdirahman says.
Even if the Sweden Democrats ever become part of the establishment and succeed in restricting immigration, Sweden is stuck with a large, segregated immigrant population that both its high achievers and its criminals won’t let the rest of the country ignore.
Sweden has lived for decades with a blissful sense that a wealthy, tolerant society can iron out all its kinks. Now, there’s a widespread sense that the country’s social and law enforcement infrastructure is overburdened because too many immigrants are coming in, and time is needed to assimilate the earlier arrivals. But time isn’t the best doctor here: Problems with previous generations of immigrants and their kids were swept under the rug for too long.
What’s needed now is clearer awareness of where the problems really are. The police and researchers affiliated with them lead the way here with their attempts to pinpoint and study the problem neighborhoods and the gangs that operate in them. Superintendent Akerlund firmly believes that in 10 to 15 years, there won’t be any vulnerable areas in his district. But he understands that dream can only become reality with constant effort and learning.
The rest of Swedish society should concentrate on the real problem, too: It’s not the recent refugee wave, it’s decades of complacency and half-hearted integration policies. For Sweden, proud of its world-leading social policies, that’s a bitter pill to swallow, but better late than never.
«Sweden is running up against a budget deadline on Nov. 15»
«If no government is in place Lofven’s caretaker government will present a transition budget»
«But technically the opposition parties could also deliver their own spending plans, which could stand a good chance of passing»
* * * * * * * *
Per usare la terminologia introdotta dal Presidente Macron, l’Europa, e quindi anche la Svezia, sono affette dalla lebbra dell’ideologia liberal socialista.
Se la lebbra può essere efficacemente combattuta vaccinando con il bacillo di Calmette e Guérin (BCG) o trattandola con le recenti terapie multifarmaco, l’ideologia liberal socialista esige un trattamento ben più complesso, i risultati elettorali ottenuti dai sovranisti, populisti.
I sovranisti traggono grande vantaggio da uno dei sintomi caratteristici della lebbra liberal socialista: il voler considerare gli avversari politici nemici mortali da distruggere fisicamente. Questo porta le formazioni politiche liberal a rifiutare ogni qualsiasi dialogo con chiunque non la pensi come loro. Nemmeno il darsi un buongiorno.
Questo concetto dell’avversario politico vissuto come nemico mortale trova il suo sbocco naturale nel muro contro muro, nella incomunicabilità, nella totale mancanza di ogni qualsiasi forma di tolleranza.
Questo è quanto sta avvenendo in Svezia.
Se è vero che i sovranisti non hanno conseguito la maggioranza, sarebbe altrettanto vero constatare come la loro stessa presenza abbia destabilizzato l’intero sistema politico svedese, ove né la componente liberal né quella socialista hanno conseguito una maggioranza. È lo stallo totale, la palude. Odiano i populisti e si odiano cordialmente tra di loro.
– Acting PM Lofven reports little progress in one-week attempt
– Pressure grows on establishment to break with bloc politics
Acting Prime Minister Stefan Lofven reported scant progress after a week of trying to form a new government amid the deepest political gridlock Sweden has ever seen.
Lofven, who’s trying to extend his four-year rule by cobbling together a new coalition, said the situation remains “difficult and complicated,” after meeting with the speaker of parliament, Andreas Norlen. The acting premier will continue with another week of talks and hold confidential discussions with the other party leaders.
“There’s just one way forward, and that is continued talks,” Lofven said at a press conference in Stockholm on Monday. “That’s our responsibility to the Swedish people.”
After opposition leader Ulf Kristersson first failed, Lofven now enters his second week in what is already a record long post-election government formation process. Sweden is in gridlock after voters flocked to a nationalist party, denying either of the two traditional blocs a majority. So far, neither side has been willing to compromise or shown any major signs they will seek to reach across the aisle to break the bloc politics that have dominated Sweden over the past decades.
Lofven has been trying to lure over two smaller parties in the center-right Alliance, the Center and Liberal parties, to form a majority. But they have so far rebuffed his entreaties, saying he needs to talk to the bigger Moderate Party to find a way forward.
Bloc politics are “damaging to Sweden,” Lofven said on Monday.
Lofven’s center-left coalition has a one a seat lead over the Alliance, but has no real path forward since the nationalists have tended to support the center-right bloc. The center-right has also painted itself in a corner since the Center and Liberals have said they will not rule with the backing of the nationalist Sweden Democrats due to its neo-nazi roots.
There’s no set deadline for how long talks can take. The speaker has yet to call for a formal vote in parliament, which has to happen four times before a new election is called. Investors have so far shrugged off the crisis and the krona has risen since the election.
But Sweden is running up against a budget deadline on Nov. 15. If no government is in place Lofven’s caretaker government will present a transition budget. But technically the opposition parties could also deliver their own spending plans, which could stand a good chance of passing.
L’intera Europa è attraversata da una profonda crisi politica. I partiti tradizionali si sono dimostrati incapaci di evolversi al passo con i tempi, incapaci di comprendere la realtà, di comprendere i reali sentimenti della gente, di quelli che poi formano il corpo elettorale.
Il crollo dei partito tradizionali è dovuto principalmente al crollo delle ideologie che propugnavano.
Tranciando un groviglio di problemi con la dragonessa, sta svanendo il concetto statocentrico e si incontrano severe difficoltà a riconcepire società e sistemi economici nei termini di stati che guidano ma non dirigono, lasciando agli attori una concreta libertà di azione.
Come tutte le epoche di transizione, il chaos regna sovrano: il vecchio è ancora forte, specie poi nel parastato, ed il nuovo non ha ancora la forza sufficiente per soppiantarlo, come nei fatti è accaduto il Polonia, Ungheria e poi in Italia.
Quello che dovrebbe essere un civile confronto di idee e progetti sta degenerando in una lotta che avrebbe fatto arrossire i bizantini del tardo impero di oriente.
A ciò si aggiunga un altro fatto, anche se molti altri dovrebbero essere considerati.
Mentre stati come la Spagna oppure i Paesi Bassi stanno reggendo alla bene meglio il chaos politico e, tutto sommato, riescono a sopravvivere almeno per l’ordinaria amministrazione, i paesi nordici considerano il chaos peggio della peste nera o dell’invasione mongola.
Alla domanda di rito “Come stai“? un tedesco risponde “alles in Ordnung“. Ordnung significa certamente ordine, ma anche e soprattutto regolamento, ordinamento, tutto secondo i piani prestabiliti.
* * * * * * *
La Svezia è da tempo nei triboli.
Per decenni è stata il prototipo dello stato socialdemocratico, che si cura del cittadino dalla culla alla tomba, avendo abbracciato in pieno l’ideologia liberal socialista. Come tutti i nordici, hanno cerato in ogni modo e maniera di foggiare la realtà ad immagine della teoria, ma in questo caso stanno facendo la fine che fecero in passato i sostenitori della teoria geocentrica.
«– Se è vero che il blocco di centrosinistra equivale a quello di centrodestra, sarebbe altrettanto vero ammettere come il primo sia improntato alla ideologia socialista ed il secondo a quella liberal. Il termine “centrodestra” è fortemente inappropriato.
– Svezia Democratica ha ottenuto 62 seggi in parlamento. Se sicuramente non può ambire al governo, altrettanto sicuramente la sua stessa presenza ha alterato in modo netto gli attuali equilibri.»
* * * * * * *
Con i suoi soli 62 deputati Svezia Democratica ha semplicemente destabilizzato il sistema politico svedese.
Ogni faccenda umana necessita dei suoi tempi.
Un bel giorno i partiti tradizionali troveranno la forza di iniziare a ragionare, di abbandonare le loro ideologie, di stare a sentire cosa voglia la gente, di togliere l’ostracismo ai veri vincitori delle elezioni. Non lo faranno? È sicuramente possibile, certamente: allora saranno travolti.
The leader of Sweden’s four-party opposition Alliance called an early end to his attempts to form a government as the Nordic nation struggles to find political stability more than a month after an inconclusive election.
After meeting with the speaker of parliament on Sunday in Stockholm, Moderate Party leader Ulf Kristersson said he remains ready to be prime minister, but that he sees no possibility of forming a government after talks with opposition colleagues and the Social Democrats.
“I have done everything I can to form a government that stands for the Alliance’s politics,” he said at a press conference.
Sweden’s center-right Alliance is divided on whether to seek support from the nationalist Sweden Democrats to form a minority government. The leaders of the Center and Liberal parties on Saturday said they wouldn’t support a narrower right-wing coalition and have steadfastly refused to rule with the backing of the anti-immigration Sweden Democrats.
Andreas Norlen, the speaker of parliament, said after meeting Kristersson on Sunday that he would again canvass the party leaders on Monday to see how to proceed.
“It’s probably reasonable to think that another person will get the job” to form a government, he said.
Sweden has now entered a second month of talks after an election handed the nationalists 62 seats in the 349-member parliament. The large chunk of seats means none of the two traditional blocs have a clear path to power without reaching out across the aisle or relying on support from the Sweden Democrats.
Both the Center Party and the Liberals have called for an Alliance government based on cooperation with the Social Democrats and/or the Green Party.
Kristersson again on Sunday ruled out a grand coalition with the Social Democrats, saying such a constellation is only a possibility during war or a national crisis.
Parties have a maximum of four attempts to form a government in a parliament vote or face a new election within three months. The government is currently being run by a care-taker government headed by the Social Democrats.
«Full preliminary results, including overseas and postal votes, showed the Social Democrat, Green and Left parties took 40.7% of the vote, giving them 144 seats, while the centre-right Alliance of the Moderate, Centre, Christian Democrat and Liberal parties won 40.3% and 143 seats»
«Both blocs are well short of a majority in the 349-seat Riksdag and whatever government finally emerges will need support either from members of the opposition bloc, or from the far-right Sweden Democrats whose 17.5% of the vote gave them 62 MPs, to pass new legislation»
Il parlamento svedese, Riksdag, conta 349 deputati: la maggioranza per poter governare parte da 175 deputati.
«– Le elezioni svedesi sono state inconcludenti per quanto riguarda un chiaro segnale elettorale sulla forma di governo che dovrebbe gestire la nazione.
– Se è vero che il blocco di centrosinistra equivale a quello di centrodestra, sarebbe altrettanto vero ammettere come il primo sia improntato alla ideologia socialista ed il secondo a quella liberal. Il termine “centrodestra” è fortemente inappropriato.
– Svezia Democratica ha ottenuto 62 seggi in parlamento. Se sicuramente non può ambire al governo, altrettanto sicuramente la sua stessa presenza ha alterato in modo netto gli attuali equilibri.
– Le elezioni svedesi ricalcano quelle di quasi tutti i paesi dell’Unione Europea. I partiti tradizionali stanno velocemente perdendo terreno mentre le forze innovative crescono altrettanto velocemente: nel prossimo parlamento europeo potrebbero raggiungere e superare il trenta per cento degli eurodeputati. I paesi europei stanno diventando ingovernabili, e l’intero sistema politico tende quindi ad implodere.»
* * * * * * *
Come avevamo prognosticato, la Svezia è crollata in un limbo politico.
Come poterne uscire sembrerebbe essere non solo materia di alchimie politiche.
«The conclusion of this experiment was bound to be explosive and prophetic. It would tell us about the trajectory of European politics and the rise of global populism»
«On the night, we were treated to the bizarre spectacle of seven out of eight main parties declaring that they were ‘winners’.»
«In the global battle between progressive and traditional values, Sweden is the standard-bearer for progressivism. Many outside observers of Sunday’s election expected to see the standard-bearer felled and humiliated»
«These negotiations depend on Swedish values, and Swedish values depend on these negotiations»
«If the country’s leaders believe in the progressive Swedish values that they have been espousing on the campaign trail, now is the time to prove it»
* * * * * * *
In Svezia si è arrivati al redde rationem.
Non è solo lo scontro politico riportato negli articoli.
Si stanno scontrando tre Weltanschauung opposte, ciascuna delle quali è incompatibile con le altre due: l’ideologia liberal, quella socialista e quella che invece rimette in primo piano il retaggio religioso, storico, culturale, sociale del paese.
Social Democrat leader Stefan Löfven has been voted out of the job by a majority of parliament – the first Swedish prime minister to be ousted in such a vote.
A total of 204 of Sweden’s 349 members of parliament voted no to Löfven as prime minister on Tuesday morning. No one abstained, 142 voted for Löfven and three MPs were not present in the chamber.
“Today, after the election, we’re doing what we promised before the election,” the Moderates’ Ulf Kristersson, leader of the largest party in the centre-right Alliance opposition, told parliament ahead of the vote. “To the Alliance it is obvious that Sweden needs a new government.”
Anders Ygeman, the group leader of the Social Democrats in parliament, argued that Sweden’s September 9th election gave 143 seats to the four-party Alliance and 144 seats to the centre-left bloc of the Social Democrats, Greens and Left Party. The centre-right however has argued that the Left Party is not formally part of government and should therefore not be counted as part of the centre-left bloc.
The Social Democrats, Greens and Left voted for Löfven, while the Moderates, Centre, Liberals, Christian Democrats and the Sweden Democrats voted against him.
The result was expected and it will now be up to speaker of parliament Andreas Norlén to ask another party leader to try to form a government. Löfven is however set to lead a caretaker government during the weeks or months it is expected to take to find a new head of government.
Löfven told reporters after the vote that he remained prepared to stay on as prime minister if asked to do so by the speaker, saying he wanted to negotiate across the political divide to seek bi-partisan compromises.
“It is my wish to continue serving our country as prime minister. I want to lead a government that enjoys broad support in Sweden’s parliament, so that we can leave bloc politics behind and take the country forward,” he said.
Elections on September 9th left neither of Sweden’s main blocs with an absolute majority, with just one seat separating the centre-left (Social Democrats and the Green Party) and the centre-right Alliance (Moderate Party, Centre Party, Christian Democrats, and Liberals).
The Sweden Democrats are the third largest group, and some right-wing MPs have suggested cooperation with the far-right party. The Centre Party and Liberals have said they would quit the Alliance if the Moderates and Christian Democrats were to negotiate a deal – for example on immigration – with the far-right in exchange for their support.
Another alternative would be for the Alliance to reach a compromise with the Social Democrats on big political issues, such as the autumn budget.
Tuesday morning’s confidence motion follows an important day on Monday, which saw Norlén of the centre-right Moderates elected parliamentary speaker, apparently thanks to the support of the far-right. Although the vote was anonymous, the anti-immigration Sweden Democrats had indicated they would support the Moderate Party’s candidate, likely hoping for support for their own candidates in exchange.
Their candidate Björn Söder lost out on a deputy speaker post in parliament though, after losing votes for the roles of second and third deputy speaker. The position of second deputy speaker usually goes to a member of the third largest bloc or party, which would be the Sweden Democrats, and Söder was the incumbent in the role, but Left Party candidate Lotta Johnsson Fornarve was chosen as second deputy speaker and the Centre Party’s Kerstin Lundgren as third deputy speaker.
Swedish Prime Minister Stefan Löfven was ousted from the role in a confidence motion on Tuesday morning. So where does this leave Sweden and its government negotiations? Here’s a recap of how we got here and what to expect next.
What’s happened since the election?
As you probably know, Sweden’s September 9th election left neither of the two main blocs (the centre-left and the centre-right Alliance) with an absolute majority, and there was just one seat between the two. The Sweden Democrats were the third biggest group, meaning some form of compromise will be essential for a working government.
Parliament reconvened for the first time since the vote on Monday, with a roll call of the newly-elected members.
The other big task was electing the new speakers of parliament. Usually, these roles are given out to candidates from different parties based on their size in the new parliament, but because the two main groups are now almost neck-and-neck, that didn’t happen this time.
The Moderate Party’s candidate Andreas Norlén was voted into the job of speaker, with the roles of deputy speaker, second deputy speaker and third deputy speaker going to candidates from the Social Democrats, Left Party, and Centre Party respectively.
With the speakers elected and Löfven having resisted calls for his resignation, lawmakers took part in a confidence vote on the PM, and Löfven was ousted from the role.
What’s the next step?
Speaker Andreas Norlén has the official task of putting forward a proposal for who should become prime minister. According to a government statement, he will begin talks with the parliamentary group leaders on Thursday.
The decision is usually made after a lot of cross-party talks behind closed doors, in order to ensure that the PM candidate has a good chance of actually forming a government backed by parliament. So far, parliament has always approved the first proposal.
In the meantime, Löfven will continue to lead a caretaker administration until a new workable government is found. This has the same power as a regular government, but is expected to take care only of day-to-day issues and things that can’t be postponed.
Who are the most likely PM candidates?
Many observers think Ulf Kristersson, the leader of the Moderate Party, will be the first choice, and he is the Alliance’s top pick, as the leader of the bloc’s largest party.
What if the first attempt fails?
The speaker has four attempts to get parliament to agree to a new prime minister, or at least convince enough MPs to abstain and not actively vote against the candidate.
If they fail to agree on any of the four proposals, a new election must be held within three months. However, this has never happened in Swedish history.
What’s the role of the Sweden Democrats?
In the lead-up to the general election, a lot was made about the potential influence of the far-right Sweden Democrats, who according to many polls were on track to become the second largest party. That didn’t happen, but they could still wield some influence.
Some of the top Sweden Democrats were critical after their candidate failed to be elected to any of the deputy speaker posts. Leader Jimmie Åkesson called the Moderate Party “weak” for not voting for a Sweden Democrat after the far-right party supported the Moderate candidate for the speaker position.
The Centre Party and Liberals have said they would quit the Alliance if the Moderates and Christian Democrats were to negotiate a deal – for example on immigration – with the far-right in exchange for their support.
Any other options?
Löfven said on Tuesday that the Social Democrats would never be a partner in an Alliance government, and that this would be “undemocratic”. But it would be possible for the Alliance to reach a compromise with the Social Democrats on big political issues, such as the autumn budget.
The big story from Sweden’s election is still to be written. As politicians wrangle, the country’s reputation and values are at stake, writes Paul Rapacioli, co-founder of The Local and author of Good Sweden, Bad Sweden.
The hypothesis put forward by the international media was clear: progressive values bite the dust in an environment of high immigration and soaring crime.
So many new, combustible ingredients had been thrown into the mix during the last term of government: a refugee crisis with an astonishingly high number of arrivals in the country, intense focus on integration failures, daily news of gangland shootings, designation as “the rape capital of Europe”, and a spate of hand grenade attacks.
In recent months some polls had predicted a 20-25 percent share for the Sweden Democrats. Many, including the party’s own politicians, had talked up their chances of becoming Sweden’s biggest party.
The conclusion of this experiment was bound to be explosive and prophetic. It would tell us about the trajectory of European politics and the rise of global populism. The world’s media put on its safety goggles, lit the blue touch paper and retreated.
There was a bit of a fizzle and then the various elements combined into an amorphous pulp of complex political details. Oh.
Here’s the moment the first exit poll came through last night putting the Sweden Democrats at 16.3%. They eventually recorded 17.6% but the dancefloor never got going after this initial shock. #SwedenElectionpic.twitter.com/g8Au35sHmw
And so it should be: the Sweden Democrats were at the centre of every debate, targeted by every other party. They owned the ubiquitous immigration issue. They had the wind of the world’s media at their back and a legion of bots sent from who-knows-where spreading their gospel of doom about the country. And yet they gained far fewer new voters than last time around.
In 2014 the Sweden Democrats added 461,568 new votes to their previous tally. On Sunday they added 297,713. That’s a 35 percent smaller surge than four years ago despite conditions in this campaign being far more favourable.
On the night, we were treated to the bizarre spectacle of seven out of eight main parties declaring that they were ‘winners’. Now the parties’ leaders are locked in intense negotiations about how best to form a government. There are said to be a dozen possible outcomes and the country could end up heading left or right or creating a cross-bloc arrangement on a different plane altogether.
I like how almost all party leaders are calling themselves the winners of this election. Swedish equality?
It’s complicated, because despite widespread international reporting that implied that this election was all about immigration, Swedes are actually more concerned about healthcare, education, equality, law and order, care for the elderly and the Swedish economy.
In the global battle between progressive and traditional values, Sweden is the standard-bearer for progressivism. Many outside observers of Sunday’s election expected to see the standard-bearer felled and humiliated. The journalists came to report on a bloody and decisive turning point but what they got was boring Swedish political negotiations.
Yes, the Sweden Democrats have grown. Yes, they will have more influence. Yes, immigration is a factor. And yes, this is important news. But the real story of this election is evolving now, slowly and Swedishly, behind closed doors: can Sweden’s politicians can find a way to thread the needle of staying true to progressive values while bringing greater effectiveness to government?
These negotiations are going to define how Sweden handles the problems, real and exaggerated, that it faces. These negotiations depend on Swedish values, and Swedish values depend on these negotiations.
If a toothless government emerges then it will be a lot harder to shorten hospital waiting times, improve schools, strengthen the police and solve the housing crisis – and in four years’ time we’ll be right back where we were last week. If the conservative parties bite the bullet and bring the Sweden Democrats into their play for power, then years of promises not to work with them will have been for nothing and political trust will be undermined for a generation.
Swedish politicians are only human and politics everywhere is brutal. But while the world is watching, Sweden’s reputation is at stake. This is a country of problem-solvers where the consensus still reigns. If the country’s leaders believe in the progressive Swedish values that they have been espousing on the campaign trail, now is the time to prove it.
At least 22 seats in 17 local Swedish city councils will be empty following 9 September elections, a SVT review of results showed. The empty chairs belong to the far-right Swedish Democrats, which won more votes than they had candidates to fill. Prime minister Stefan Lofven still hopes to form a new national government with smaller parties or a grand coalition to avoid relying on the Sweden Democrats.
«Full preliminary results, including overseas and postal votes, showed the Social Democrat, Green and Left parties took 40.7% of the vote, giving them 144 seats, while the centre-right Alliance of the Moderate, Centre, Christian Democrat and Liberal parties won 40.3% and 143 seats»
«Both blocs are well short of a majority in the 349-seat Riksdag and whatever government finally emerges will need support either from members of the opposition bloc, or from the far-right Sweden Democrats whose 17.5% of the vote gave them 62 MPs, to pass new legislation»
* * * * * * *
Il parlamento svedese, Riksdag, conta 349 deputati: la maggioranza per poter governare parte da 175 deputati.
Lo avevamo scritto giorni prima delle elezioni elettorali, e preconizzammo ciò che adesso sta succedendo.
«Se i Democratici svedesi (Sverigedemokraterna, SD) riusciranno a superare il 15% sarà già per loro una grande vittoria, ma se passassero il 20% sarebbe un vero e proprio trionfo.
E possono vincere? No, ma sicuramente intralciare la maggioranza che uscirà dalle urne. Rimasti a lungo fuori dal parlamento, gli Sverigedemokraterna avevano già fatto parlare di sé nel 2014, con 42 seggi e il 12,9% dei consensi. Nessuno prende in considerazione una loro vittoria domani, ma i sondaggi parlano di un balzo fino al 20% dei consensi. Si tratterebbe al massimo di una 70ina di seggi, meno della metà dei 175 necessari. Eppure quanto basta per “ricattare” su determinate decisione una probabile coalizione formata dai socialdemocratici (dati intorno al 25%, il minimo storico), i verdi e altre forze della sinistra. Non si esclude neppure l’ipotesi di una sorta di grande coalizione alla tedesca fra centrosinistra e centrodestra, con l’intenzione di escludere il partito e le sue interferenze sul governo»
* * * * * * *
L’epicrisi è il giudizio conclusivo che si desume da una somma di giudizi parziali.
Apprestiamoci quindi a fare l’epicrisi della attuale situazione svedese, tenendo però conto che tutte le realtà umane hanno sempre un ché di imprevedibile.
Come avevamo preconizzato dalle proiezioni preelettorali, SD, Svezia Democratica, ha conseguito 62 deputati, portandosi al 17.5% dei suffragi.
Lo schieramento di sinistra, ad ideologia socialista, ha ottenuto 144 seggi, mentre quello di centrodestra, liberal, ne ha conseguiti 143.
Nessuno di questi due schieramenti intende colloquiare con Svezia Democratica, ma nemmeno desiderano formare un governo di Grande Coalizione, almeno per il momento.
In questa situazione di muro contro muro, lo stallo è evidente.
* * *
«Stefan Löfven, the Social Democrat prime minister, rejected a demand from Ulf Kristersson, the Moderate party leader, to step aside and help the centre-right alliance form a viable government, saying it would be “illogical” for the larger bloc to facilitate an Alliance government. “You can discount that idea absolutely,” Löfven said»
«But Kristersson, the centre-right’s candidate for the premiership, said it was “natural” for the Alliance to now seek a mandate to build a government. “We want the government to respect the result and resign,” he told a news conference.»
«The prime minister had earlier said he believed the election result marked the end of Sweden’s traditional system of political blocs, which has been severely destabilised by the steady rise of the anti-immigration Sweden Democrats.»
«A “grand coalition” of the Social Democrats and Moderates could also lend credence to the Sweden Democrats’ claim to be the only true opposition»
«There are only two choices: victory or death»
* * * * * * *
Da oltre settanta anni la Svezia si era abituata ad avere uno schieramento nettamente vincente, fatto questo che assicura la possibilità di costituire un governo coeso ed efficiente, con una chiara politica sia interna sia estera. Le coalizioni sono per loro natura instabili, quasi sempre frutto di accordi che suonano tanto da compromessi momentanei.
Mettiamo anche che alla fine, spinti dalla sindrome governopenica, si faccia una coalizione.
Se questa non rigasse diritto, al passo dell’oca, Svezia Democratica potrebbe avere una crescita subitanea.
Tutto questo si riverbererà sul comportamento che la Svezia terrà in seno al Consiglio Europeo: il loro nuovo premier dovrà diventare una campione di cerchiobottismo
Da ultimo, ma non certo per ultimo, a maggio del prossimo anno si terranno le elezioni europee..
Full preliminary results, including overseas and postal votes, showed the Social Democrat, Green and Left parties took 40.7% of the vote, giving them 144 seats, while the centre-right Alliance of the Moderate, Centre, Christian Democrat and Liberal parties won 40.3% and 143 seats.
Both blocs are well short of a majority in the 349-seat Riksdag and whatever government finally emerges will need support either from members of the opposition bloc, or from the far-right Sweden Democrats whose 17.5% of the vote gave them 62 MPs, to pass new legislation.
The Sweden Democrats, populists shunned by all other parties because of their neo-Nazi roots, achieved their highest ever score but did not get near the 25%-plus share of the vote that their leadership and many opinion polls had forecast. Depending on the make-up of the new government, however, they could still wield considerable influence in parliament.
The official result would be confirmed this weekend, the election authority said on Friday, after all votes had been recounted and double-checked. That is a longer process than normal because of the high turnout of 84.4%, but standard electoral practice in Sweden and not expected to change the result.
Stefan Löfven, the Social Democrat prime minister, rejected a demand from Ulf Kristersson, the Moderate party leader, to step aside and help the centre-right alliance form a viable government, saying it would be “illogical” for the larger bloc to facilitate an Alliance government. “You can discount that idea absolutely,” Löfven said.
But Kristersson, the centre-right’s candidate for the premiership, said it was “natural” for the Alliance to now seek a mandate to build a government. “We want the government to respect the result and resign,” he told a news conference.
The Christian Democrat leader, Ebba Busch Thor, said “the Alliance is the government alternative that is clearly larger than the Social Democrats, and clearly larger than the current government” of the Social Democrats and Greens. Löfven, however, is counting the former communist Left party, which backed the outgoing coalition in parliament, as part of his centre-left bloc.
The prime minister had earlier said he believed the election result marked the end of Sweden’s traditional system of political blocs, which has been severely destabilised by the steady rise of the anti-immigration Sweden Democrats.
He wants to form some kind of coalition or cross-bloc deal with the smaller Centre and Liberal parties but both have so far indicated they would prefer to stick within their bloc, aware that splitting the Alliance could condemn the centre right to years in opposition or as minority members of Social Democrat-led governments.
A “grand coalition” of the Social Democrats and Moderates could also lend credence to the Sweden Democrats’ claim to be the only true opposition. The other parties are so far holding to their pledge not to negotiate with the far-right party, which has promised to use its parliamentary votes to sink any government that does not give it a say over policy, particularly on immigration.
“Our enemies have really forced us into a life-and-death struggle for our culture and our nation’s survival,” Mattias Karlsson, the Sweden Democrats’ parliamentary group leader and chief ideologue, wrote on his Facebook page. “There are only two choices: victory or death.”