Шведский парламентский тупик: выход найден?

Abstract

This publication is a kind of afterword to the previous article by the same author, printed in MEMO Journal, 2015, no. 2. The article was received by the editorial board in October 2014.The afterword was caused by extraordinary events in the Swedish politics in December 2014. In the Riksdag in early December, the government lost a vote on the budget, due to the Swedish Democrats voting in favour of the centre-right opposition proposal. In return, the government announced snap elections for March 22nd, 2015, which officially were supposed to be confirmed on 29th December. The most likely outcome of these elections would have been a recurrence of the main result of the September elections, that is, the position of the Swedish Democrats as kingmaker. To avoid dependence on the Swedish Democrats, on December 27th, the government parties and the centre-right opposition signed an agreement that made it possible for a minority government to get its own budget approved. Thus, the agreement brought the country out of parliamentary deadlock and enabled her to regain control, but deprived the Swedish Democrats of the effectiveness of voting and by that ignored the will of their electorate. In Sweden, the agreement was given the opposite evaluations. Despite being tactically effective, the agreement has not solved the problem of the Swedish Democrats and especially anti-immigration sentiments in the society that the party reflects. The deal of the government and the centre-right opposition is a political-technological solution to this problem, whereas there needs to be found a political one. A dialogue between the parties of the establishment with the Swedish Democrats is needed, leading to some compromise. Probably, for the first time since the 1930's, the Swedish establishment has begun to lose its appreciation of the necessity for political compromise. However, some signs of understanding the necessity of reforming immigration policy are already visible; this is evidenced by the statements of a number of establishment politicians.