Why the far right lost: 11 lessons for Europe from Sweden’s election

Por Tim Ross — POLITICOPolitics » POLITICO

STOCKHOLM — As far-right leader Jimmie Åkesson danced beside the pink balaclava-wearing singer Miss Smut at his final campaign rally, he hoped a late surge in the polls would carry his Sweden Democrats into power.

But the following day’s election instead delivered a rude shock to Sweden’s anti-immigration vanguard: A loss of vote share, support and influence for the first time since the SD was founded by neo-Nazis in the 1980s.

The left bloc narrowly won the contest and will now seek to form a government that doesn’t include any right-wing parties.

Amid reports of recriminations within the SD, Åkesson may take time away from frontline politics, but insists he won’t resign. 

The disappointing outcome for the SD is a rarity these days in European politics: A far-right populist party making a name for itself campaigning against immigration, but then falling back instead of grasping power. 

POLITICO spoke to experts and key players, including outgoing center-right Prime Minister Ulf Kristersson and his likely Social Democrat replacement Magdalena Andersson, to draw some lessons from the campaign.

The far right allied with the center — and lost 

The SD’s vote share fell from 20.5% in 2022 to 17.5% this year, even though it had supported Kristersson’s center-right coalition within the parliament for four years. Although Åkesson’s party succeeded in pushing Kristersson’s administration to adopt tougher policies on crime and immigration, their electoral result was ultimately worse. 

Kristersson’s Moderates party, meanwhile, increased its support and overtook the SD to become the second-largest force in the parliament. That outcome will have drawn the notice of German Chancellor Friedrich Merz’s Christian Democrats and the far-right Alternative for Germany, for example, as well as of Britain’s Conservative Party and Reform UK. 

It’s OK to blame voters, if it fits your story

Åkesson’s explanation for the SD’s disappointing result was bang on brand for an anti-migrant populist. At a Friday press conference he claimed the Social Democrats and their allies on the left had been “very good at mobilizing the Islamist voters who previously had other parties to vote for.” 

At the same time, he said, some right-wing supporters had voted for tiny parties that didn’t make it over the 4% vote threshold required for representation in parliament. 

Åkesson wasn’t alone in flagging voter behavior. Social Democrat leader Andersson spent much of the campaign warning voters not to put Åkesson and his team in power, casting it as a central election issue. She told POLITICO on election day that voters who supported Kristersson and other right-wing parties, knowing that support would put far-right ministers in government for the first time, were “in denial.”

“They don’t really want to see that they actually vote for a government dominated by Sweden Democrats,” she said.  

Swedish firewall held, but more by chance than design 

Mainstream European parties have for decades pursued a “firewall” policy against the far right to block it from power, determined to prevent a return of the fascism that so scarred Europe in the 20th century. 

In reality, Sweden formerly stout firewall has developed many holes over the past four years. Kristersson broke the taboo against working with the SD back in 2022 when, in a coalition with two other right-wing parties, he signed a deal to implement key SD priorities in exchange for their support in parliament. 

The pact gave Åkesson significant influence over Kristersson’s government, allowing the SD to drive a hardline crackdown on immigration and an agenda to tackle violent crime. 

Kristersson dismissed criticism that he was opening the door to extremists who would end Sweden as a tolerant country. Billing himself as a pragmatist, he asked voters to judge him on his government’s success at bringing down crime and immigration. 

“For me, it’s the result that counts,” Kristersson told POLITICO in the final week of the campaign. In order to solve problems, he said, you need a majority in the parliament — which under Sweden’s proportional representation system meant working with the SD. 

Don’t take normalization too far

Ahead of the election Kristersson went a step further, for the first time promising Åkesson seats in his Cabinet if their rightwing alliance retained power. 

“That probably was beyond the pale for a small number of people who would otherwise have voted for one of the right-wing parties, particularly the Liberals,” said Nicholas Aylott, associate professor of politics at Södertörn University. In a close election, he said, such small things can make a big difference.

Overall, Aylott said, the firewall wasn’t central to this year’s election, despite attempts by left-wing parties to make it so. 

Whatever the impact of Kristersson’s gambit, this election was almost a tie and nearly went the other way. If two seats had flipped to the right bloc, Åkesson’s team would be preparing to take over key ministries in the government. And if Andersson can’t persuade other parties to back her in coalition talks, that could still happen. 

Firewalls don’t work forever 

The Sweden Democrats entered parliament for the first time in 2010 — and mainstream center and left-wing parties refused to cooperate with them. According to Aylott, that “very strong” firewall allowed the SD to build support in the country.

“That created a huge space in the Swedish political context in which anyone with any sort of cautious or skeptical view toward immigration at the time really had only the Sweden Democrats to choose,” he said. 

By 2022, with gang crime rife, the SD’s tough stance on law and order and migration drove it to its best-ever result. Its second-place finish put in a powerful position to influence Kristersson’s government.  

It’s not a coincidence, Aylott said, that the far right fell back again after the firewall was partly set aside to allow it to join the government, for all that it didn’t have ministers in Kristersson’s Cabinet. 

The firewall “is not holding anymore” in much of Europe, according to Grégoire Roos, Europe program director at the Chatham House think tank in London. “The citizens who cast their ballots for these parties are increasingly young. So referring to the darkest times of history does not appeal to them at all,” Roos said.

“To some extent, the more you bash these parties, the more popular they get,” he added, noting it was true of Trump and others in Europe. “I think in this regard we can see a pattern.”

Normal for Nordics 

It’s not unusual for the far right to be integrated into governments in Nordic countries such as Norway and Finland. The center left in Denmark has also adopted particularly tough policies against migration, in part to mitigate the appeal of far-right populists. 

These recent developments contrast sharply with the situation in Southern and Western European countries like Germany, Spain and France. 

Pro-Russian policies cost you votes

While some European far-right parties have maintained pro-Russia attitudes without incurring major electoral costs, that’s not the case in countries like Sweden.

Sweden’s authorities regard Russia as the country’s No. 1 security threat, while Moscow has menaced Swedish airspace and interests in the Baltic Sea in recent years. Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022 prompted Sweden to end decades of military neutrality and join NATO — a decision that has enjoyed wide public and political support.

In the final days of the election campaign, the SD was hit by a scandal over alleged Russian infiltration — an inevitable voter repellent in Swedish politics. 

Immigration isn’t the issue it used to be 

After Sweden’s record 2015 intake of asylum seekers, the political backlash saw governments of both persuasions introduce harsh restrictions — reducing migrant numbers by 96% a decade later. 

Andersson, who also favors limits on immigration, said some of the governing coalition’s policies had gone too far for average Swedes, such as deporting the teenage children of migrants who had grown up in Sweden. “These are young people that are part of the club and now they have to leave,” she said. “People don’t like it.” 

Far right a victim of its own success 

Two big issues that had driven support for the SD in previous elections — gang shootings and immigration — were lower on the agenda in this election, Aylott said. Perhaps because Kristersson’s coalition, with the SD’s support, had succeeded in reducing gun crime and throttling immigration. 

Four years ago, the headlines were all about “gang violence, daily shootings, kids being killed,” Kristersson told POLITICO. “Now we have brought that down by some 80%.” 

On immigration, Kristersson’s government began paying some foreign-born people €30,000 to leave the country. 

“For me, results matter,” Kristersson said. His Moderates party won more seats this time around — perhaps a sign of voter gratitude — but the SD, which was so closely identified with anti-immigration policies, fell back. 

“The paradox is that when the situation begins to feel less acute, it falls down the list of voters’ priorities,” said Aylott.
When that happens, “probably the party that was favored is not going to be favored again.” 

Healthcare, education and the economy topped the list of voter concerns, according to exit polls.

Centrist governments should just do their jobs 

Andersson believes the SD can be fought on their traditional right-wing economic positions as well as on “the hate they have spread” and would propagate further if they won office. 

Above all, she said, the lesson for centrists is that they have to deliver on voters’ concerns when they have the chance.

“If you have governments that actually do deliver better living standards, better schools, better healthcare, build a society where people can feel hope for the future, then the room for right-wing populist parties will be smaller,” she said. “It’s clear that after the financial crisis of 2008- 2009, traditional parties haven’t really been able to deliver.”

Even Kristersson, although his bloc lost power, saw his center-right Moderates increase their share of the vote after a campaign in which he highlighted his government’s successes.  

Far right not dead yet

Andersson said support for the far right “is not something you stop in a four-year period.” Voters across Europe choose populist nationalist parties “because politics is not delivering,” she told POLITICO. 

“If traditional political parties aren’t delivering a better hope for a better future, then you vote for something else. So it’s really up to us to do our homework: Deliver when we are in power, and in opposition have good and realistic programs that we can deliver on once we are in power again.” 

Aylott agreed that while the election was “certainly a setback” for the SD, it wasn’t a “total collapse.”

There has been speculation that Åkesson could walk away from the SD in the weeks ahead. If that happens, a new leader could revive the party with a return to a more radical posture, Aylott said. The freedom to speak out that comes with being in opposition will also likely help. 

“It’s not inconceivable that we might see some re-radicalization of the party and an attempt to fire up the activists again,” Aylott said. “This could be a critical moment for the party. It could lead to infighting and very damaging disputes, but it could equally lead to a sort of renewal of the party’s appeal, perhaps with a younger leader.”

Fonte: POLITICOPolitics » POLITICO