“My Europe Does Not Build Walls” the Swedish Government´S Discourse Change in the Refugee Issue
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
“My Europe does not build walls” The Swedish government´s discourse change in the refugee issue Emelie Torstensson Master thesis, 15 hp Supervisor: Media and Communication Studies Anders Svensson International/intercultural communication Examiner: Spring 2016 Peter Berglez JÖNKÖPING UNIVERSITY Master Thesis, 15 credits School of Education and Communication Course: Media and communication Science with Box 1026, SE-551 11 Jönköping Sweden Specialization in International Communication +46 (0)36 101000 Term: Spring 2016 ABSTRACT Writer: Emelie Torstensson Title: “My Europe does not build walls” Subtitle: The Swedish government´s discourse change in the refugee issue Language: English Pages: 53 During the autumn of 2015 one of the largest refugee crisis in Europe occurred. About 60 million refugees were forced to flee their homes and about one third of them were seeking protection in Europe. Sweden was one of the countries that received most refugees per capita before they decided that they could not handle the situation any more. This paper examines the discursive representation of refugees by the Swedish government, and especially the discursive change that occurred in November, 2015. Using Critical Discourse Analysis, the study focus on four texts provided by the government. The study compares the discourse of these four texts with the drastic increase of refugees during the time period to examine how that affected the discourse. The analysis reveals that the government had the ambition to persist to their ideological standpoints in their discourse. However, since the actions they implemented strived against their ideologies their discourse became confound and repetitive. At the same time as the government tried to draw on their ideology of solidarity, they used discourse strategies connected to an elite racism discourse to defend their actions. Previous research says that discourse change is characterized by conversely or inconsistent elements, and this study has come to the same conclusion. The government seemed “forced” to change their discourse which led to an inconsistency of styles and vocabulary. The government still tried to use a humane discourse, but when they presented their new policy they distanced themselves from the refugees by using aggregation or simply removing them as actors. Keywords: discourse change, political communication, refugees, refugee crisis, government, CDA 1 Contents List of figures ......................................................................................................................... 1 1 Introduction ................................................................................................................. 2 2 Background .................................................................................................................. 4 2.1 History ............................................................................................................................. 4 2.2 Swedish parliament ......................................................................................................... 6 2.3 Social Democrats ............................................................................................................. 7 2.4 Swedish Green Party ........................................................................................................ 8 2.5 Aim and research questions ............................................................................................ 9 3 Previous research ....................................................................................................... 11 3.1 Political discourse about RASIM .................................................................................... 11 3.2 An overview of strategies .............................................................................................. 13 3.3 Discourse changes ......................................................................................................... 14 3.4 Positioning the study ..................................................................................................... 15 4 Theoretical framework ............................................................................................... 16 4.1 Critical Discourse analysis .............................................................................................. 16 4.2 Discourse and ideology .................................................................................................. 18 4.3 Discourse and Social practise ........................................................................................ 19 5 Method ...................................................................................................................... 20 5.1 Methodological approach ............................................................................................. 20 5.2 Selection of data ............................................................................................................ 21 5.3 Three level text analysis framework .............................................................................. 22 1.1.1 Actors .................................................................................................................... 22 1.1.2 Actions ................................................................................................................... 24 1.1.3 Argumentation ...................................................................................................... 25 5.4 Social structures and social practice .............................................................................. 26 5.5 Validity ........................................................................................................................... 27 6 Analysis ...................................................................................................................... 28 6.1 What features the government´s political discourse in the beginning, given their political ideology? ....................................................................................................................... 28 6.1.1 Speech by Stefan Löfven ........................................................................................ 28 6.1.2 Press Conference by Stefan Löfven ....................................................................... 34 6.2 What features the government´s political discourse after the about-face, and how did they motivate the change of discourse? ........................................................................ 40 6.2.1 Press conference by Anders Ygeman .................................................................... 40 6.2.2 Press conference by Stefan Löfven and Åsa Romson ............................................ 43 6.3 Social structures and social practice .............................................................................. 51 7 Conclusion .................................................................................................................. 53 8 Bibliography ............................................................................................................... 57 Appendix 1: Speech by Stefan Löfven ................................................................................... 62 Appendix 2: Press Conference by Stefan Löfven ................................................................... 65 Appendix 3: Press conference by Anders Ygeman ................................................................ 69 Appendix 4: Press conference by Stefan Löfven and Åsa Romson ......................................... 71 List of figures 5.3 Figure 1: Levels of textual analysis …………………………………………………………. 22 5.4 Figure 2: Social structures and social practice ………………………………………… 26 1 1 Introduction Five years of war in Syria have forced around 4.8 million people to flee across borders. Another 6.6 million Syrians are internally displaced. The war in Syria has created the biggest refugee and displacement crisis of our time (unhcr.org). The amount of refugees seeking asylum in EU put the fundamental principles for a regulated migration out of play. Since July 2015, the development has reached a dimension that puts higher demands on both the EU- cooperation, and individual countries ability to handle the massive increase of refugees. In Sweden, one of the most important political questions among the people during 2015 relates to immigration and integration issues (Sifo 1, 2015). At the end of August, the media reports about sunken boats in the Mediterranean Sea and hundreds of refugees found dead, and yet other reports regarding the finding of 50 asphyxiated refugees in a truck in Austria (Asplid, Lindén and Lundberg, 2015). Just one week later, September 2, 2015, the iconic picture depicting a three-year-old boy washed up on a Turkish beach made global headlines. The image of the drown three year old boy was an “eye-opener” for the western world about the war in Syria, and suddenly politicians and government´s all over the (western) world realised that they needed to shape a more human approach to immigration and integration issues (Kingsley and Timur, 2015). On September 6, 2015 Swedish Prime Minister Stefan Löfven delivered a speech at a gathering for refugees stating “My Europe do not build walls” (regeringen.se, authors translation). Within only three months the Swedish government’s discourse on refugees changed drastically. From being one of the most open and supportive countries towards refugees, Sweden became