In the debate on how Germany could succeed in limiting migration numbers, CDU parliamentary group leader Friedrich Merz mentioned Denmark and Sweden as examples. “Why are they able to solve the problem, and we are not?” Merz asked. Indeed, the number of asylum applications in these two Nordic countries is very low. In Denmark, this has been the case for a long time: last year, there were 2,479 asylum applications (compared to 351,915 in Germany). The reason is an extremely restrictive migration policy—currently, even many Syrians in Denmark are losing their protection. This is partly because Denmark does not have to comply with EU laws in this area.
Sweden, on the other hand, was one of the main destinations for migrants in 2015, just like Germany. At that time, 162,800 asylum applications were submitted. However, the number has drastically decreased since then: last year, there were only 12,644 applications, and by the end of July this year, there were only 5,600. According to the Swedish Migration Agency, the country will likely have the lowest number of arrivals since 1997 by the end of this year. The government also recently announced with pride that, for the first time, more migrants left the country in the first half of this year than arrived: the net population decreased by 5,700 people. In 2023, more people left Sweden from Iraq, Somalia, and Syria than immigrated. “Sweden is no longer a country that asylum seekers migrate to,” said Migration Minister Maria Malmer Stenergard. “The government’s efforts have produced results.”
However, even though the current conservative government is now claiming success, the decline is likely due to the long-standing changes in asylum policy. In 2016, the then-governing Social Democrats reversed course, meeting the EU minimum standards for protecting individuals. The currently ruling conservative minority government, tolerated by the right-wing populist Sweden Democrats, who mainly set the tone on migration issues, has recently toughened the policy further. Family reunification has been made more difficult, social benefits reduced, and access to citizenship for refugees has become nearly impossible. Sweden is no longer primarily a country of asylum immigration, but has once again become one of labor immigration, Prime Minister Ulf Kristersson recently wrote in a Swedish newspaper.
Sweden is now trying, much like Denmark, to send deterrent signals to countries of origin. For example, many Afghans are currently losing their protected status, and thus their housing and work permits. Sweden is also repatriating some of them via Uzbekistan, which is publicly portrayed as deportation, even though it is technically voluntary return. Talking to refugees in the country today, many are deeply concerned. There are even cases where the children of long-recognized refugees, who have held Swedish citizenship for years, are losing their residency rights despite having lived in the country for many years.
Nonetheless, Sweden may be surprised to be held up as an example elsewhere. Neighboring countries still fear “Swedish conditions,” especially in Denmark. This is due to recent murders and attempted murders in gang environments, often carried out by young Swedes. These so-called “child soldiers” are recruited by gangs in Sweden for this purpose. The country continues to be plagued by gang crime. Although the number of shootings and explosions has recently declined somewhat, they remain a regular occurrence in Sweden. The perpetrators are getting younger and younger: according to police, the number of people under 15 suspected of being involved in attempted murders tripled last year. They are recruited through social networks and in schools. “We have a situation where children are actively seeking work as murderers,” said Carin Götblad, head of the national police operations department. Increasingly, children from stable backgrounds, previously unknown to the police, are becoming involved in gang crime.
Migration experts agree that Sweden has failed in integration. Unlike Denmark, migrants were welcomed with open arms but were then largely left to fend for themselves in large social housing complexes, rather than being integrated with a “carrot and stick” approach, as is often said in Denmark. As a result, gangs in Denmark currently find it difficult to recruit disaffected youth for criminal acts, partly due to the large sums invested in preventive work and schools in problem neighborhoods. In Sweden, on the other hand, there are enough young people willing to be recruited. According to police, around 700 young Swedes are at risk of being recruited for criminal purposes in Denmark. In the suburban neighborhoods of Sweden’s major cities, schools are poor, there are few jobs, and few integration opportunities. As a result, it is mainly second- and third-generation migrants who turn to crime. In this way, Sweden could serve as an example for Germany—though as an example of what not to do.
All publishing rights and copyrights reserved to MENA Research Center.
