A few years ago, two friends of mine were walking with a Danish friend through Copenhagen one evening. As they passed the parliament building, a vaguely familiar man walked out. Their Danish friend smiled and said ‘good night’. The man responded in kind, and headed for a bus stop. It was Nyrup Rasmussen, the prime minister of the day.
The queen of Denmark is regularly to be seen walking alone through the main shopping thoroughfare of Copenhagen. Sweden is similar. In the country that gave the world Ombudsmen, part of government openness means that senior politicians walk openly and freely amongst the public, and generally disdain body guards.
Another anecdote; a journalist friend described interviewing Chris Patten when Patten was with the Northern Ireland office during the 1980s. The conversation continued as Patten walked to his car, got down on his knees and thoroughly examined the underneath, before standing up again and opening the car-door. All the time speaking as if nothing out of the ordinary was happening. Imagine incorporating that kind of personal risk (and risk to your family) into your daily routine.
Anna Lindh, Sweden’s rising political star, did not survive the multiple stab wounds she received while out shopping with a friend on Wednesday afternoon. As she was someone who championed openness in government, it will be a terrible shame if her legacy must be a distancing of Swedish politicians from the people they represent.
Open Democracy has an essay from a political commentator and long time friend of Lindh. The Economist considers how her death will affect the euro referendum in Sweden.
{ 13 comments }
Ted Barlow 09.12.03 at 3:35 pm
I remember an anecdote from one of Bill Bryson’s books. He was travelling in Denmark when someone told him that the queen quite often went for walks without a bodyguard. Bryson asked, “Who protects her?” “Why, we all do,” said his host, which he thought was sweet.
Keith M Ellis 09.12.03 at 4:54 pm
I don’t quite understand how this event can be seen by anyone as a real criticism of Sweden’s open society. People are attacked and killed for non-political reasons every now and then, even in Sweden, and not having government leaders protected by bodyguards inevitably means that such will happen to one of them from time to time.
Palme’s assasination was probably political in some sense, and so more appropriately was cause for reevaluation. Not Lindh’s.
Ophelia Benson 09.12.03 at 5:31 pm
“People are attacked and killed for non-political reasons every now and then, even in Sweden, and not having government leaders protected by bodyguards inevitably means that such will happen to one of them from time to time.”
Hmm. Not necessarily. Not in countries where a high murder rate is not taken for granted. Statistically, in countries where people don’t just wander around casually murdering people at random intervals, the likelihood of a cabinet minister’s being stabbed to death in a department store just because it was one of those things is pretty damn small. Like non-existent, I would think.
scott h. 09.12.03 at 7:29 pm
This report says she was chased by her assailant through the store. It also describes her as a rising star and the only politician with the charisma to save the “yes” to the euro campaign. Sounds like she was fairly well known and deliberately targeted. Hopefully they catch the guy.
Keith M Ellis 09.12.03 at 8:43 pm
“Like non-existent, I would think.” Well, not quite. Close to non-existant. But it will happen. I don’t understand your point.
eric 09.12.03 at 8:43 pm
Pretty needless death, really. It sounds like a single security guard would have prevented it.
Whack jobs attack famous people. Governments should plan for that.
Ophelia Benson 09.12.03 at 10:31 pm
My point.
“not having government leaders protected by bodyguards inevitably means that such will happen to one of them from time to time.”
No it doesn’t and no it won’t, in a country where random murders are extremely rare and cabinet ministers or government leaders are, obviously, a tiny fraction of the population. My point is that the odds of any one Swede getting murdered is, statistically, tiny, so why whould we assume it will inevitably happen to government ministers *apart from* the fact that they are goveernment ministers?
Keith M Ellis 09.13.03 at 12:37 am
“…so why whould we assume it will inevitably happen to government ministers apart from the fact that they are goveernment ministers?”
Because the probability is non-zero?
Every victim of random, violent crime is a member of some minority group. Physicists make up a very small portion of Swede society, so does that mean that if a Swedish physicist is murdered as Lindh was then it must be because he/she was a physicist? Why, I’m wondering, am I arguing with you about this? It’s a simple matter of fact, not opinion.
Ophelia Benson 09.13.03 at 1:11 am
Well, I’m not sure either. It is a small point, certainly. But this is what you said:
“People are attacked and killed for non-political reasons every now and then, even in Sweden, and not having government leaders protected by bodyguards inevitably means that such will happen to one of them from time to time.”
Perhaps I’m thick, but I don’t see what you mean. If you mean given many centuries or perhaps millennia, eventually one of Sweden’s few murder victims will end up being a government minister, on the same principle that if you allow a chimpanzee infinite time it will eventually write ‘Hamlet’, then perhaps you’re right. But that’s not what I took you to be saying. I took you to be saying that “such will happen to one of them from time to time.” From time to time sounds to me more like every few years or perhaps decades than like thousands of years.
Or to put it another way, random, non-politically motivated murders of Swedish government leaders are not a common occurrence, not something that just happens “from time to time”. That’s all. A small factual point. Unless you just meant something quite different from what you said, in which case, never mind.
(I did actually have a point even though it’s a small one – that violence is not common in Sweden, so it’s odd to assume that government ministers [who are a much smaller class than doctors, by the way: we’re talking about, what, ten or twenty people total?] are going to be killed at random now and then.)
bry 09.13.03 at 11:28 am
given the descriptions of the murder it sounds quite a bit more likely to be political in nature as opposed to a random act.
mitch 09.13.03 at 11:51 am
My theory is that it was a revenge attack, for the EU’s declaration of Hamas as a terrorist group just a few days before.
zizka 09.13.03 at 6:43 pm
Keith, you come up with the damndest arguments! Yeah, everyone is a member of some small minority group (or infinitely many, really), but there are reasons why we always suspect political motives when political leaders are murdered, especially when there is no other apparent motive.
The class of well-known Swedish political leaders may be the same size as the class of redheaded, lefthanded paraplegics, but people would be quite justified in suspecting political motives in this case, but not suspecting a conspiracy against r.h.l.h. paraplegics if one of them is murdered.
The reasons for this are not to be found in a statistics text.
a different chris 09.16.03 at 12:11 am
Whoa, slow down everybody! For once on a blog you’re ALL making sense, so just be happy for smart company.
The “political” factor is important, but for a deranged person it has to do with notoriety, not politics per se. So yes they are more likely to be in danger but no it doesn’t mean that it was political in the sense everybody’s using it here.
If this guy is a John Hinckley (sp?) type, a famous athelete would have also been a possible target. But if the pictures posted on the Web are accurate, he would have gotten his ass kicked by somebody like Annika Sorenstam.
Comments on this entry are closed.