Mellan säkerhet, handel och etik: En jämförande analys av Sveriges förhållningssätt gentemot Iran och Saudiarabien

Sammanfattning

Sweden has long cultivated an international identity as a “moral authority” by promoting democracy, international law and human rights. However, its foreign policy toward authoritarian regimes has shown inconsistencies with these core values. This thesis investigates this discrepancy through a comparative case study of Sweden’s bilateral relations with Iran and Saudi Arabia. These two countries share considerable similarities in terms of government, human rights abuse and regional influence. Despite this, Sweden frames the relation with Saudi Arabia as a strategic partnership while Iran is described as a security threat. By analysing statements from Swedish politicians, the study aims to understand how three central foreign policy priorities; national security, trade and human rights, shapes Sweden’s approach to each country. The comparative analysis reveals that while both countries threaten Swedish national security and undermine human rights, trade considerations carry the most weight in shaping bilateral relations. When trade is threatened with either party, Swedish politicians become more reluctant to acknowledge national security threats or criticise human rights abuses stemming from either nation.