Janice R. Andrews
Sweden has charged Iran with leading a mass text message campaign that incited protests and calls for revenge following a series of Quran burnings in the country. The Swedish Security Service (SAPO) identified the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) as responsible for sending approximately 15,000 messages aimed at inciting violence.
These texts, written in Swedish, targeted the public in response to the Quran burnings, events that have ignited significant protests in Sweden and beyond. The messages, allegedly from a group calling itself the “Anzu team,” criticized Sweden for “demonizing Islam” and called for retaliatory actions.
Senior Swedish prosecutor Mats Ljungqvist confirmed that the mass messaging campaign was facilitated by a data breach at a Swedish company, which remains unnamed. Iranian authorities have not yet responded to these allegations.
The data breach comes amid heightened tensions in Sweden, where Quran burnings, though permitted under the country’s free speech laws, have sparked global outrage, particularly from Muslim-majority countries. SAPO officials emphasized that the intent behind these messages was not only to incite protests but also to create societal divisions and damage Sweden’s international reputation by portraying it as Islamophobic.
Justice Minister Gunnar Strömmer voiced serious concerns, highlighting the alarming nature of a foreign state—specifically Iran—attempting to destabilize Sweden. He stated, “The involvement of a foreign power to fuel polarization is deeply troubling.”
While the initial investigation has concluded, Swedish authorities have not dismissed the possibility of reopening the case if further evidence emerges. However, the chances of prosecuting or extraditing those involved seem slim due to their foreign connections, according to Ljungqvist.
This incident highlights the increasing global worries about the use of cyber tactics to exploit cultural and religious tensions for political motives, leaving nations like Sweden to navigate the challenging balance between upholding free speech and thwarting foreign interference.
