Growing Municipal Resistance to Sweden's Controversial Voluntary Repatriation Policy
Municipal leaders across Sweden push back against the national voluntary repatriation policy, emphasizing integration and criticizing the political climate around immigration in 2025.
- • Salem’s political leadership rejects meeting with the national repatriation coordinator, highlighting local opposition.
- • A survey reveals over 75 municipalities have declined meetings with the national coordinator, signaling widespread municipal resistance.
- • Commentators criticize government incentives for immigrants to leave, emphasizing immigrants' societal contributions.
- • The debate reflects deep divisions in Swedish political discourse since 2010 over immigration and integration.
Key details
Sweden's national policy encouraging voluntary repatriation of immigrants in 2025 has met with significant resistance at the municipal level, highlighting tensions between national objectives and local priorities.
In Salem, a municipal chief initially agreed to meet with the national coordinator for voluntary repatriation, Terésa Zetterblad, to discuss ways to promote return efforts. The meeting is scheduled for late January 2026. However, the municipal political leadership was not informed beforehand, leading to pushback. Arne Närström, chairman of Salem's municipal council and part of the ruling coalition of Social Democrats, Rönningepartiet, Centerpartiet, and Liberalerna, declared he would not participate in the meeting. The coalition emphasizes focusing on integration, education, employment, and safety rather than promoting policies that encourage residents to leave. This position reflects a broader municipal stance: a survey by Sveriges Radio found that 75 municipalities had already declined meetings with the national coordinator as of late October, with some reports indicating over 100 refusals, including Södertälje.
The political debate surrounding these policies has also sparked concerns among commentators about their societal impact. Tannaz Edalat critiques the government's approach, noting that paying immigrants to leave exacerbates polarization and ignores the essential contributions immigrants make to Swedish society, especially in vital but often invisible roles such as those her father’s immigrant colleagues hold in Stockholm’s subway system. She highlights a trend since 2010 where mainstream political discourse has shifted towards anti-immigrant rhetoric, deepening divisions between ethnic groups and between citizens and politicians. Edalat praises municipal leaders like Roland Boman of Jokkmokk, who reject the government's repatriation strategy and advocate for more inclusive, compassionate political dialogue.
Overall, the friction between national voluntary repatriation efforts and municipal resistance underscores a critical debate in Sweden’s approach to immigration in 2025, pitting government policy against local priorities that emphasize integration and community cohesion over encouraging departures.