Sweden will continue deporting Somali nationals whose asylum applications have been rejected, despite growing political scrutiny over whether development aid has been redirected to secure cooperation from Mogadishu.
Migration Minister Johan Forssell defended Sweden’s return agreement with Somalia this week, arguing that the policy is delivering “clear results” and will serve as a model for similar arrangements with other countries. The strategy forms part of Stockholm’s broader effort to enforce asylum decisions more strictly and accelerate removals.
According to Swedish police data, Somalia had accepted 25 deportees by November, including 14 individuals removed following criminal convictions. The number of forced returns has risen sharply in recent years, climbing from six cases in 2021 to 29 in 2023—an increase officials cite tell as proof that the cooperation is functioning.
Yet the agreement has come under renewed public scrutiny after Swedish media revealed that close to 100 million kronor in development aid had been redirected to programs aligned with Somalia’s federal government. Separately, the Ministry of Justice provided an additional 5 million kronor to finance three positions inside a Somali government office responsible for processing return cases.
Investigations by Ekot and Dagens Nyheter reported internal concerns raised by officials at Sida, Sweden’s international development agency, and at Sweden’s embassy in Mogadishu. Those concerns centered on transparency, accountability, and the risk that aid funds could be absorbed into weak or politicized Somali state structures.
Critics questioned whether the arrangement effectively ties development assistance to migration enforcement, exposing Swedish taxpayers to corruption risks in a country consistently ranked among the world’s most corrupt states.
Forssell rejected allegations that the funded positions amounted to “ghost jobs” or that Swedish funds had been misused. He said the support is channeled through the International Organization for Migration (IOM), not directly to Somali authorities, and is intended to strengthen administrative capacity rather than buy political compliance.
“We have no evidence of wrongdoing,” Forssell said. “If something emerges, we will act.”
The controversy has escalated beyond the media. Formal complaints have now been submitted to Sweden’s Parliamentary Committee on the Constitution, with opposition parties questioning whether the government blurred the line between development aid and domestic immigration enforcement.
At the heart of the dispute lies a broader policy shift. Forssell confirmed that Sweden plans to increasingly link development assistance to whether countries cooperate in accepting nationals who lose their legal right to remain in Sweden. He argued that states have a responsibility to take back their citizens and that aid should reinforce that principle.
“We want more countries to take responsibility for their returning citizens,” Forssell said, noting that Sweden already operates similar return agreements with several other states.
The Somali case, however, carries particular sensitivity. Somalia’s fragile institutions, limited territorial control, and long-standing governance challenges raise questions about whether deportees are being returned to a state capable of ensuring basic security and reintegration. At the same time, the arrangement highlights a growing European trend: using aid, capacity-building, and administrative support as leverage to enforce migration policy beyond EU borders.
For Sweden, the political calculation is clear. The government views effective deportations as essential to restoring confidence in the asylum system. For critics, the risk is equally clear—that development aid meant to reduce instability and corruption is being repurposed to sustain a system that depends on them.
As deportations continue, the debate is no longer just about migration control. It is about where humanitarian assistance ends and transactional statecraft begins—and whether that line can be enforced as firmly as Sweden’s new asylum policy.
