Overview of the alleged Somalia aid deal
In late 2023, Swedish media reported that the government privately signed a deal with Somalia’s authorities to redirect roughly 100 million kronor of aid toward projects perceived as benefiting the Somali prime minister’s administration. In return, Sweden would assist with the return of migrants who had been forcibly expelled from Sweden. The arrangement, described by some as a “Somalia deal,” has sparked debate about how aid is allocated and the secrecy surrounding its terms.
The government’s stance and rationale
Sweden’s aid minister, Benjamin Dousa, has argued that the arrangement is a pragmatic tool within the country’s aid policy aimed at creating an effective return process. He maintains that the funds were not directed to the prime minister, to any politician, or to the national budget. Instead, he describes it as part of a dialogue with the recipient country to identify where aid can have the greatest impact. Dousa points to previous experiences with returns facilitated through similar approaches in regions such as Iraq and Lebanon, and he even suggests Syria as a potential next option for returns.
Is it really informal?
Despite Dousa’s defense, critics have pressed for more transparency. Morgan Johansson, the Utrikespolitisk talesperson for the Social Democrats, argues that the lack of a formal written agreement makes it harder to scrutinize and justify the disbursements. Dousa characterized the arrangement as a cooperative understanding rather than a formal treaty, arguing that a written contract is not always necessary when both sides share a common interest in advancing returns and aid effectiveness.
Parliamentary scrutiny and accountability
On the request of the opposition, the parliament’s foreign affairs committee decided to summon Dousa and Sida’s director-general Jakub Granit to question them about Somali funding and the return policy. The hearing aims to clarify the legal basis for the disbursements, the criteria used to select projects, and who ultimately benefits from the funding. The disclosure questions reflect ongoing tensions between expedient policy moves and the need for thorough oversight.
Numbers, outcomes, and comparisons
When pressed, government officials declined to reveal how many Somalis had been returned since December 2023. Sveriges Radio reported that 28 individuals were forcibly removed in 2024. In a related move, Finland halted around 8–9 million euros annually in projects after failing to secure a similar return agreement, illustrating how aid tied to migration policy can become a flashpoint in domestic politics.
Why this matters for Sweden’s aid policy
Analysts say a Somalia-related aid arrangement, if real, would demonstrate a tangible shift in how Sweden uses aid to support broader policy goals—particularly migration and return diplomacy. Proponents contend such a strategy can yield concrete results and align aid with humanitarian and security objectives. Critics warn that wrapping funds into policy outcomes risks reducing aid’s independence and making it more difficult to audit and evaluate.
What happens next
The ongoing parliamentary inquiries mean more sunlight on the legal foundations of the Somali funding and the governance surrounding returns. The case could set a precedent for how Sweden conducts confidential policy accommodations abroad and how future aid adjustments are scrutinized by the legislature. The coming months will reveal whether the Somali funding was a prudent strategic move or a misstep in transparency and accountability.
