| Summary: | Our aim with this paper is to study the debate concerning the refusal of entry of the two Egyptians and the involvement of USA, to see if the Swedish sovereignty has been compromised. We have chosen two theories, realism and radicalism, to read if opinions can be identified of supporting one of them. The empiricism we selected are from debate articles in the big news papers Dagens Nyheter, Svenska Dagbladet and Expressen. We also studied the debate in the Riksdag . The method we used was qualitative and is called analysis of content. The result we could conclude was that most of the debaters are disappointed with how the government handled the whole situation, but still believes that it made the decision on itself. This opinion reflects the theory realism. Further more, we found that the debate in the Riksdag was more diverse in terms of reflecting both of the theories, than the news papers. We also conclude that the debaters preferably would talk about torture and the violation of human rights and not the reason to why the government made that decision.
|
|---|
