Erik Helmerson's do not own the Swedish foreign policy

On Wednesday presented an annual black list. The christian organisation Open Doors to so-called World watch list ranks the 50 countries where the world's christians are treated worst, and this year's compilation contains no direct surprises.

north Korea is, as usual, the country where the persecution is that grymmast. Christians, like other religious, to be seen as enemies to the state, arrested, sent to labour camps, tortured.

muslim more or less dictatorial gudsstater where islam is mandatory and defection is punished severely: Afghanistan, Somalia, Libya, Pakistan... On the tenth place can be found the first real democracy, India, where hindunationalismens rise makes life a torment for both christians and muslims.

Three trends are mentioned as a background to the increasing persecution: They are authoritarian states with increasing grip, ultranationalismen which stamps minority religions as ”foreign” and the våldsbejakande the islamists, whose core business is now increasingly shifted from the Middle east to sub-Saharan Africa.

A bloody example of the latter was seen in this week's deadly attack on hotel in Nairobi, Kenya.

considered the world's most persecuted religious group is a realisation that is slowly starting to give the impression in the debate, and even more slowly in the Swedish policy.

It took a depressingly long time for the minister for foreign affairs Margot Wallström (S) to seriously raise your voice in support of the christians.

According to the deep-seated prejudice that still seems to characterize the foreign policy is a christian, white and rich, a persecuted man, poor and brown. In reality, most christians, both the brown and the poor, and many of them are subjected to severe harassment. A fact which, apparently, takes time to sink in.

of the many foreign policy areas where the government Löfven and the government, Wallström received criticism. We recall, for example, the precocious recognition of the palestinian state, where the government ignored both the parliament as the EU's common foreign policy and was panting in the road on my own.

We remember further snedtramp from the minister of foreign affairs in middle east policy, in which Israel lost all respect for Sweden – with all what it entails of lost opportunities for discussion and influence.

Foreign policy should not be decided in the whispering conversation between the socialist veterandiplomater.

in addition, the government's fiaskoartade management of relations with saudi Arabia. Eligible american criticism of the country's barbaric legal system ended with Stefan Löfven had to send a special envoy with the royal decrees in the hand got to crawl in the desert sands, and to point out that Sweden certainly never meant to offend islam.

A common and not improbable guess is that it was to secure arab votes in Sweden's campaign for a seat in the UN security council. If it is true, unfortunately, we do not know, because the campaign largely were conducted behind a veil of classified documents.

There are more plumps up the in the government's diplomatic protocol. For example, Margot Wallström, and a tendency to want to engage in the defence policy of the rya to Nato, at the same time that defense minister Peter Hultqvist trying to find new partnerships with the organization.

the foreign minister's major critics. The party has a strong tradition of mark against dictatorships and oppressive ideologies, nurture the relationship to Israel and to let foreign policy – not least the Swedish aid – is characterized by the quest for freedom and democracy.

Now is L together with the center to some extent due to the next Löfvenministär. Foreign policy is not covered by the januariöverenskommelsen. It is, however, another area where social democrats need to realize that they can no longer control at their own discretion.

To the Left, with its view of, inter alia, the EU and Nato should not get increased influence over Sweden's relations to the rest of the world is obvious. The agreement has anchored many areas in the middle, the same thing must happen with the foreign policy.

for the entire population. Thus, this should be decided in parliament, not in a closed room at the foreign MINISTRY and Sida, or in the whispering conversation between the socialist veterandiplomater.