TCO’s Chair: “Sweden Can’t Survive a Day Without Immigrants”

In an opinion piece in Expressen, TCO’s chair Therese Svanström claims that Sweden – and especially the Swedish labor market – would not function for a single day if only Swedes lived here, as it was in the past before the era of mass immigration changed the country’s demographic profile. At the same time, she points out that, in contrast to the past, there are now large numbers of unemployed immigrants in the country who the government must now ensure get into the labor market – “every single person” without exception. However, Svanström does not provide any concrete answers as to how this will be achieved.

Already in the headline and introduction, Svanström asserts that “Sweden can’t survive a day without immigrants” and that “the Swedish labor market does not work for a single day without people who are foreign-born.” These claims serve as a springboard for a broader point: the labor market is the backbone of society, not only economically but also in terms of democracy and security policy. Without work – no cohesive society, and without cohesion – no civil defense.

“Every single person” must enter the labor market

The core concept in the article is Svanström’s repeated phrasing that “we will need every single person in the labor market.” However, the text does not specify what this entails in practice. Svanström wants the government to provide employment for all foreign-born individuals who are currently outside the labor market – regardless of limited Swedish language skills, lack of formal or requested qualifications, or even their background or conduct.

Svanström argues that one must not distinguish between different groups of unemployed – there should be no “us and them.” The TCO chair believes that all people “want and can work,” and that their exclusion from the labor market is a result solely of political decisions and poor matching.

Work as a moral and security policy duty

Throughout the article, she repeatedly connects work to loyalty and willingness to defend the country. Svanström asks: “What will the willingness to defend Sweden look like if one doesn’t feel welcome here?” Work thus becomes not only a right, but also a kind of prerequisite for social solidarity and ultimately for national resilience – if we don’t give immigrants jobs, they won’t want to defend Sweden.

This line of reasoning leads to the conclusion that a society that tolerates high unemployment among the foreign-born is not only unjust, but downright dangerous. It opens the door to “polarization, distrust, and extremism.”

She stands for the vision – others must provide the tools

Svanström calls for “political decisiveness” and a “guiding goal of full employment” but does not offer any concrete labor market policy proposals. How jobs are to be created for “every single person,” how productivity is to be ensured, or how language and qualification obstacles are to be addressed remains unanswered.

In her opinion piece, Svanström is clear: without immigrants, Sweden grinds to a halt; without work, democracy collapses; and without full employment, national defense is at risk. How the “every single person” goal is to be realized more concretely, after decades of mass unemployment among the foreign-born – even during governments more ideologically aligned with TCO – she now leaves as a demand for the Kristersson government.