(Stockholm) – A majority of Swedish parliamentary parties support significantly stronger measures to curb Israeli government abuses in the Occupied Palestinian Territory than current policies suggest, six civil society organizations said today.
The groups released a survey ahead of the September 13, 2026 general election. Seven of the eight parties in the Riksdag, Sweden’s parliament, responded to the survey, a joint initiative by Act Church of Sweden, Amnesty International Sweden, Diakonia, Human Rights Watch, Swedish Fellowship of Reconciliation, and the Swedish Peace and Arbitration Society, who have now published the results.
“This survey provides important information from the Swedish parliamentary parties on the steps Sweden needs to take to address grave human rights concerns with the Israeli government,” said Christina Abdulahad, advocacy officer at Human Rights Watch. “It is crucial for Sweden’s next government, whatever its composition, to bring Swedish policy in line with its international legal obligations.”
All seven supported Sweden’s obligation to enforce International Criminal Court (ICC) arrest warrants against Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Defense Minister Yoav Gallant, as well as for targeted European Union sanctions. Four support a national ban on settlement trade, suspension of the EU-Israel Association Agreement, and restoration of funding for the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA).
The survey asked parties to state their positions on Sweden’s obligations under international law drawn from the UN Genocide Convention, two advisory opinions by the International Court of Justice (ICJ), and the ICC arrest warrants for alleged war crimes and crimes against humanity in Gaza.
Specifically, parties were asked whether Sweden should review its bilateral relations with Israel, ban trade with illegal settlements, suspend the EU-Israel Association Agreement, sanction Israeli ministers and officials responsible for atrocity crimes, halt arms imports and exports, restore core funding to UNRWA, and uphold its obligation to enforce ICC arrest warrants.
The results show broad support for some measures, notably the settlement trade ban, targeted sanctions, and cooperation with the ICC.
On four other issues, the responses indicate a difference between the government coalition and the opposition. The opposition supports a national ban on settlement trade if the EU cannot agree to an EU-wide ban, suspension of the EU-Israel Association Agreement, a comprehensive review of Swedish relations with Israel, and restoration of UNRWA funding. Arms imports and exports remain the most contested issue, with differing positions across all responding parties. The results suggest that Swedish policy could shift depending on the election outcome.
The Sweden Democrats, the second-largest party in the Riksdag, did not respond to the survey. The party has publicly opposed suspending the EU-Israel trade agreement and called for a review and termination of all funding to Palestinian organizations.
“The survey shows that there is broad political consensus on fundamental principles, such as support for the ICC,” said Erik Lysén, director of Act Church of Sweden. “At the same time, we would like to see Sweden take on a clearer responsibility. It is encouraging that several parties wish to introduce a national ban on trade with the settlements, in line with several other countries in Europe. Upholding international law is not a matter of the right or the left, but is about taking responsibility for common rules that protect people, prevent conflicts, and safeguard an international order based on justice rather than power.”
Facts Only
* Six civil society organizations released a survey regarding Swedish parliamentary party support for stronger measures to curb Israeli government abuses in the Occupied Palestinian Territory.
* The survey was conducted ahead of the September 13, 2026 general election.
* Seven of the eight parties in the Riksdag responded to the survey.
* The responding groups were Act Church of Sweden, Amnesty International Sweden, Diakonia, Human Rights Watch, Swedish Fellowship of Reconciliation, and the Swedish Peace and Arbitration Society.
* All seven supported enforcing ICC arrest warrants against Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Defense Minister Yoav Gallant, as well as targeted EU sanctions.
* Four parties supported a national ban on settlement trade, suspension of the EU-Israel Association Agreement, and restoration of funding for UNRWA.
* Parties were asked about obligations under international law, including those from the UN Genocide Convention and ICJ advisory opinions.
* Specific measures inquired about included reviewing bilateral relations with Israel, banning settlement trade, suspending agreements, sanctioning officials, halting arms transfers, and restoring UNRWA funding.
* Broad support was shown for the settlement trade ban, targeted sanctions, and cooperation with the ICC.
* The Sweden Democrats did not respond to the survey.
Executive Summary
Full Take
The divergence between general support for fundamental principles, such as supporting the ICC, and differing views on specific policy mechanisms—such as arms trade or the status of the EU-Israel Association Agreement—reveals a complex political landscape where universal moral obligations do not translate into unified strategic action. The fact that support for tangible measures like the settlement trade ban is broad suggests an emerging consensus among parliamentary groups regarding international legal norms, even if political coalitions remain fragmented on implementation details. This pattern implies that future Swedish policy will be heavily mediated by electoral strategy rather than purely legal or humanitarian imperatives. The differing positions of the opposition regarding the EU-wide versus national approach to settlement bans suggest a strategic calculus where internal political realities weigh against maximalist international alignment. The unresponsiveness of the Sweden Democrats, who publicly oppose certain funding and agreements, highlights a potential gap between stated political positions and measured responses in official consultations. The underlying tension lies in balancing adherence to international law with domestic political feasibility, forcing an examination of how public accountability interacts with shifting geopolitical realities.
Bridge Questions: If support for ICC enforcement is universal but action on settlements remains contested, what specific domestic or international pressure points could shift the calculus regarding arms trade and UNRWA funding? How does the non-response of a major party affect the perceived validity of the consensus among those who participated? What mechanisms are necessary to ensure that broad moral consensus translates into consistent governmental policy across electoral cycles?
Sentinel — Human
The text presents complex, sourced information with a clear, values-driven argument, characteristic of human advocacy journalism analyzing political and legal responses.