The Swedish Immigration Catastrophe – A Cautionary Tale

Sweden has long been plagued by crime and violence perpetrated by immigrant-background gangs. However, since the turn of the year, this phenomenon has intensified even further, with more than 30 bomb attacks carried out since New Year's, most—if not all—of which are linked to disputes between criminal gangs.

As a result of all this, the country's Prime Minister, Ulf Kristersson (Moderates), has stated that "yet another wave of violence is underway, that is clear. Bombings are happening practically every day; on the other hand, fatal shootings have decreased. But before this is resolved, the entire 2020s will pass by."

He also admitted that "we are clearly unable to control this wave of violence right now." And the problems are only exacerbated by the fact that the uncle of a Kurdish-background gangster has been murdered, which is likely to escalate the violence even further in the coming weeks and months.

All of this should be carefully noted in other Western countries that practice so-called humanitarian immigration. The intention may, of course, be excellent, but as Sweden’s example shows, the danger is that sooner or later, it could lead to a complete disaster.

One indication of this is the violent suppression of freedom of speech. One of its literal embodiments was the murder, carried out last night by gunfire, of Salwan Momika, an Iraqi-born man known for burning Qurans in protest against the rise of Islam in Sweden.

* * *

Finland has closely followed Sweden’s struggle against immigrant-background crime and has taken lessons from it. As a sign of this, the Finnish government has proposed changes to the criminal code to impose harsher penalties for crimes committed by street gangs and for acts of humiliation violence.

Additionally, the use of a child below the age of criminal responsibility to commit a crime would be explicitly criminalized and punished more severely. This proposal has been driven by the fact that in Sweden, gangs lure preteen into carrying out violent acts they deem necessary, as these minors are not legally accountable due to the age threshold.

One can only hope that these proposals will pass in Parliament. If they do, implementing Swedish gang tactics in Finland will become more difficult—or may not happen at all.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
A Murder in a Well-Known Finnish Immigrant Neighborhood
Nordic Police Announce: Spread of Gang Violence Cannot Be Stopped
Managing Societal Change with a Growing Muslim Population

Misleading Claims About European Forests

Finnish forestry professor Annika Kangas wrote in a column for a forestry magazine about two eye-opening cases, neither of which brings credit to research in the field.

According to her, an international research group in 2020 claimed (in this publication), based on satellite image analysis, that the area of forest logging in Europe had increased significantly. In Finland, the increase was allegedly 54 percent, and in Sweden, 36 percent. Furthermore, the biomass removed was estimated to have increased by up to 69 percent.

However, statistics from the same period indicated that the average logging area in Finland had only increased by 7.6 percent between 2016 and 2018 compared to the years 2011–2015, and the volume removed had increased by 13.8 percent. In Sweden, logging had even decreased.

When this data was compared in detail with official forest inventory data from Finland and Sweden, it became evident that advancements in remote sensing technology had significantly improved the probability of detecting logging during the observed period. The large increase in biomass removal, on the other hand, stemmed from a misinterpretation: the assumption that biomass is entirely removed in thinnings—an incorrect assumption.

The analysis relied on readily available global datasets that describe changes in forest canopy cover over time. However, these datasets do not allow for distinguishing between natural disturbances, thinnings, clear-cuttings, or even permanent deforestation.

This was information that the researchers who published these erroneous results should have been aware of. Or at the very least, they and other researchers working with remote sensing data should know by now; yet these same time series continue to be used in other studies, such as those modeling the impact of logging on certain bird species, for which they are entirely unsuitable.

Then, last summer, another claim was introduced (I could not identify the original report Kangas was referring to), asserting that the area of forests with trees at least 15 meters tall had significantly decreased in Europe. The largest decrease—about 20 percent—was again said to have occurred in Finland and Sweden.

This, however, is untrue. According to extensive field measurements, the area of such forests had actually increased during the observed period—by 25 percent in Sweden and by 35 percent in Finland. No explanation has been found for these errors, but they share a common feature with the earlier study: they rely solely on remote sensing. Field measurements were not conducted, nor were the remote sensing results validated on the ground.

This highlights the intense competition for research funding, which demands the production and rapid publication of new findings in large quantities. This competition often leads to the hasty adoption of new, modern methods, without first establishing whether these methods are truly suitable for the intended purpose.

In the worst cases, this rush can result in disasters like those described above, which may—even after corrections have been made—leave the general public and policymakers with an incorrect impression. For example, I have repeatedly encountered claims on social media suggesting that large trees are declining in Finland—a misconception likely fueled by the second study discussed here and the associated reporting before corrections were made.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
The Finnish forest is life-threatening to asylum-seekers
Why are boreal forest fires on the rise everywhere but in Finland?
A new justification is needed for environmental activists