Malmö has something of a Scandinavian Marseille, located in the very south of Sweden. Rosengard is the most exotic district. At the shopping center, a Muslim prayer room occupies a small wing, between a pharmacy and a fast-food restaurant. Women in hijabs push prams between businesses. A few streets away, Zlatan Court, a small football pitch built in 2007 where Ibrahimovic played as a child, is a reminder that the Swedish star grew up here. Long associated with riots, trafficking and score-settling, the place is today surprisingly calm.
This Sunday, the Swedes renew their Parliament. In this country which once considered welcoming migrants to be a national virtue, the decor has changed as much as the political discourse. The kingdom has made changes to immigration. The Sweden of 2015, the one which welcomed 163,000 asylum seekers in one year, no longer has many defenders. On asylum, the right and social democrats now agree on the essentials: we must keep arrivals at a low level, demand more from new arrivals and expel delinquents more easily. The battle now concerns the firmness of the system.
The most striking thing is that this change of direction no longer needs to be concealed. In her program, Magdalena Andersson, president of the Social Democrats and possible next head of government, writes in black and white: “The restrictive migration policy remains in place. » We still need to agree on what “restrictive” means. Tino Sanandaji only half believes it. Swedish economist, author of the bestseller Massutmaning (“The mass challenge”), he is more nuanced on this consensus.
“Andersson is an economist, she never participated in the open borders hysteria”he explains to the Tangwall Campagin. But he disputes the idea of a general closure. Nearly 89,000 first residence permits were still issued in 2025. “By focusing only on refugees, the press and the government have exaggerated the magnitude of the turning point”he decides.
The real Swedish consensus, according to him, is less about closing borders than about ending large-scale asylum. “They removed one entry route, but left the others open. Migrants naturally refer to it”observes Sanandaji. Among these flaws: low-skilled labor immigration, family reunification and certain student sectors. His reading of the election is contained in one sentence: “In Sweden, politicians respond to public opinion. If you have a left-wing government while public opinion shifts to the right, it will end up pursuing right-wing policies. »
A four-party government
Andersson could win while applying for four years a migration policy whose main terms were imposed by the right. Tuesday evening, facing Jimmie Akesson, who since 2005 has led the Sweden Democrats, a nationalist party and today the third political force in the country, she defended a strict migration line. A speech that no social democrat would have made ten years ago. His red line is elsewhere. On the legal ground. The Stockholm County MP refuses that permanent residence permits already granted can be withdrawn retroactively.
Akesson was already demanding, at the time when his party consisted of a handful of seats, a drastic reduction in immigration. In 2022, his party won 20.5% of the vote, ahead of the Moderates of Ulf Kristersson himself, who would become Prime Minister a few weeks later and who is now seeking re-election. The populist party did not enter government, but the Tidö agreement, concluded in 2022 with the three ruling parties, gave it direct influence on immigration and penal policy.
This time, Akesson wants more. Kristersson accepted in the spring the principle of a four-party government in which the Sweden Democrats would obtain ministries. A victory for the right would bring down the last barrier: the party, previously inaccessible, would enter for the first time at the heart of the executive.
Above all, Akesson can campaign on results. And he doesn’t hold back. “Shootings, explosions and burglaries are down,” he insisted during the debate. On firearms, the fall is dizzying. Sweden reached a record of 62 gunshot deaths in 2022. In the first half of 2026, the police only had eight, compared to 27 over the same period last year. The number of shootings was divided by more than five between the first half of 2022 and the first half of 2026: 205 against 39. Malmö embodies this shift better than any other city. 65 shootings in 2017. 17 last year.
In 2018, 12 people were shot and killed there and 23 injured. In 2025: one dead, one injured. Sanandaji sees this as the effect of a broader movement. “Since the police tightened their grip and sentences were increased, gang violence has declined significantly”he judges, before immediately tempering his observation. Eight deaths over a full year would remain, on a Swedish scale, a “high number”. Neighboring Norway has no such homicides, or only one per year. But compared to the peak four years ago, “the improvement is enormous”.
Purchasing power, school, inequalities: Andersson attacks elsewhere
Andersson therefore attacks elsewhere: purchasing power, school, health, inequalities, and above all the hypothesis of the Sweden Democrats entering the government. This week, a case of alleged links with pro-Russian circles offered him one more argument. A Novus poll published Wednesday gave 50.7% to the four parties likely to support Andersson, compared to 48.1% to the bloc led by Kristersson. A detail which counts for more than its electoral weight: the Liberals, for months announced below the 4% necessary to enter the Riksdag, have risen to 5.8%. Their disappearance would have almost condemned the right.
Akesson repeats, from meetings to TV sets, that Andersson will not be able to hold his migratory line if it depends on the Greens, the Left Party and the Center, all three pro-immigration. Sanandaji nevertheless believes in the word given: “I don’t think they’ll go back on what they’ve already done. » The Sweden of 2015, which wanted to be a generous exception in a Europe already committed to controlling migratory flows, will no longer have, in 2026, any serious candidate for the post of Prime Minister to defend this reception model.
