The ongoing conflict in Gaza has created a dire humanitarian crisis, leaving thousands in need of urgent medical care. The European Commission has appealed to member states to accept patients from Gaza for treatment, but the Swedish government has thus far refused. This stance has drawn criticism, particularly from the Green Party, who argue that Sweden has a moral obligation to assist and possesses the capacity to do so. The debate centers around the balance between providing targeted aid to a small number of individuals through medical evacuations versus broader humanitarian assistance that reaches a larger population.
The World Health Organization (WHO) estimates that approximately 12,000 Palestinians in Gaza require medical evacuation. While several European countries have responded to the crisis by accepting patients, the total number remains under one hundred. Sweden’s Minister of Health, Acko Ankarberg Johansson, has defended the government’s decision, arguing that the cost of transporting and treating a limited number of patients in Sweden is disproportionately high compared to the impact of broader humanitarian aid. She emphasizes that Swedish funds are being directed towards initiatives that can benefit a significantly larger number of people in need.
The Green Party, however, contends that the recent ceasefire presents a changed situation, demanding that the government reconsider its refusal to accept patients. Green Party spokesperson Amanda Lind asserts that Sweden has both the resources and the moral imperative to provide assistance. She points out that Gaza’s healthcare system is on the brink of collapse, lacking essential medicines, personnel, and the capacity to treat the overwhelming number of severely injured individuals. Lind argues that if other European nations are able to accommodate patients from Gaza, Sweden should follow suit.
Lind emphasizes that Sweden should pursue a dual approach, providing both direct medical care through patient evacuations and broader financial support for humanitarian organizations. Healthcare providers such as Aleris and Karolinska, who have experience treating patients evacuated from Ukraine, have indicated their capacity to also care for patients from Gaza. Lind emphasizes the existing logistical framework and infrastructure developed during the Ukrainian crisis, making it feasible to extend these resources to Palestinians. While acknowledging geographical proximity and the availability of non-conflict-affected countries in the Middle East as potential alternatives, Lind notes that neighboring countries like Egypt also face strained healthcare systems. She underscores the WHO and the European Commission’s assessment that a broader European response is necessary, arguing that this necessitates Sweden’s participation.
Despite the pressure, the Swedish government remains steadfast in its position. Minister Ankarberg Johansson reiterated her support for the ceasefire and her commitment to monitoring the humanitarian situation in Gaza. She highlights Sweden’s contribution of medical equipment to Egypt and increased funding to organizations like UNICEF and UNFPA, which are actively engaged in providing maternal and reproductive healthcare in the region. Furthermore, the government has doubled its humanitarian aid contribution to UNRWA, the UN agency responsible for Palestinian refugees, for its response in Gaza and the surrounding region for 2025. This demonstrates, according to the minister, a commitment to a broader, more impactful aid strategy.
The core of the disagreement lies in the strategic approach to aid delivery. The government prioritizes reaching a larger population through financial support and resource allocation to established organizations operating within the region. This approach, they argue, maximizes the impact of Swedish aid funds. Conversely, the Green Party advocates for a more direct approach, emphasizing the moral imperative to provide immediate medical care to those in dire need, leveraging existing capacity and logistical frameworks established during the Ukrainian refugee crisis. This reflects differing perspectives on the effectiveness and moral obligations of humanitarian aid in complex geopolitical situations.
