Elsa Widding, an independent member of the Swedish Parliament, is one of the few political voices that is highly critical of Sweden’s almost limitless support for Ukraine and how the Swedish government is escalating the conflict instead of promoting peace and diplomacy.
– Surely it cannot be that Ulf Kristersson and Pål Jonson are driven by other interests, such as those of the US government and military? These are interests that completely ignore the prosperity and security of Sweden and its people, she wondered in a debate earlier this year.
Recently, the Swedish government, led by Defense Minister Pål Jonson (M), announced that Sweden will further increase aid to Ukraine and finance the production of long-range weapons capable of striking targets deep inside Russia.
– Supporting Ukraine is Sweden’s top security priority, claims Jonson, but the independent member of parliament Elsa Widding is highly critical of the decision.
“Pål Jonson says yes to continued long-distance missile attacks into Russia! What is wrong with the man?”, she writes on X and links to an interpellation debate from June this year where she put the Minister of Defense against the wall regarding the Ukraine war and the threat to Sweden.
Pål Jonson säger ja till fortsatta långdistansrobot attacker in i Ryssland!
Vad är det för fel på karln??https://t.co/3UZ8dcAw4R via @YouTube— Elsa Widding (@ElsaWidding) November 24, 2024
“Destroying the last remnants of Ukraine”
Widding argued that a ceasefire might have been realistic in 2022 when Russia actually showed a willingness to negotiate peace – but that the West persuaded Ukraine to break off peace talks and instead pushed for continued war, which according to Widding cost hundreds of thousands of Ukrainian men their lives.
– Sweden is contributing to the destruction of the last remnants of Ukraine. We are actively aiding in the deaths of more Ukrainian men and women, the separation of more families, and the orphaning and traumatization of more children. We call this helping”, she argued during the summer debate, asserting that Sweden should cease supporting this conflict.
– How far should we dare to push Russia before we in Sweden expose ourselves to a disproportionately large risk of escalation to nuclear weapons, as the Russians have pointed out? she further questioned.
“The winner is the defense industry”
The outspoken politician also highlighted the absurdity of sending a large part of Swedish weapons to Ukraine, making ourselves vulnerable to attack, and said it is highly illogical to provoke the enemy while decimating your own defense capabilities.
– The only winner in this cynical game is the defense industry. Could it really be that Ulf Kristersson and Pål Jonson are driven by other interests, such as those of the U.S. government and military? These are interests that completely disregard Sweden and the well-being and security of its population.
– Could it really be that we are giving away our country, our resources, and the lives of our youth? We cannot stake them as pawns in a game where the US does everything and more to achieve its military strategic goals. Surely the minister does not believe that Ukraine’s right to join NATO is more important than the survival of our own civilization? she continued.
“Destructive agenda”
Instead of working for continued war and escalation, Widding believed that Sweden should work for peace – something we are also committed to under the Lisbon Treaty.
– Unless Minister Jonson immediately stops his destructive agenda, we may soon be able to add a bombed-out Sweden to the list. This action has, under the laws of war, made us a legitimate target for Russian attack.
Jonson did not share Widding’s concerns and believed then, as now, that Sweden should continue to pump arms and money into Ukraine “sustainably and long-term” – no matter what the cost.
Although Widding is supported by many war-weary voices on X, who describe Jonson as a “warmonger”, criticism of her there is sometimes harsh, not least from other politicians – where the Conservative MP Jan Ericsson, for example, claims that she “runs Putin’s errands”.
