Meta isn’t in the habit of walking away from markets. But in Sweden, the company is drawing a hard line. If the government moves forward with a proposed surveillance law requiring backdoor access to encrypted messages, WhatsApp may pull out of the country entirely.
Janne Elvelid, Meta’s head of policy in Sweden, didn’t mince words when speaking to journalist Emanuel Karlsten:
“We’re doing everything we can to support the police in their work against crime,” Elvelid said. “But that doesn’t mean that we’re going to compromise on safety and privacy for our users. We’re willing to accept that our services may not be available everywhere or in every country if that is the price for keeping our promise to users that our chat services will be secure.”
The statement is as much a warning to Sweden as it is a declaration of Meta’s broader strategy. The company, which owns both WhatsApp and Messenger, thrives in markets where it can dictate the terms of engagement. It has fought similar battles before, resisting government demands for data access under the guise of protecting users, all while continuing to collect vast amounts of metadata for its own purposes.
The Swedish government, on the other hand, sees this as a security issue. The proposed law would give police and intelligence agencies the ability to intercept digital communications, including encrypted messages, in cases of national emergencies, wartime scenarios, or serious criminal investigations. It would also require app providers to store metadata, information on who communicates with whom, for up to two years.
But the most controversial aspect of the law is the so-called bakdörrslag — the “backdoor law” — which would force encrypted messaging services to create a means of access for authorities. The security risks are obvious: once a backdoor exists, it’s not just governments that can use it. Criminals, foreign intelligence agencies, and anyone skilled enough to exploit the vulnerability would have an entry point into private communications.
If WhatsApp and Signal pull out of Sweden, millions of people will turn to less secure, potentially unregulated platforms. Criminals, who already have access to sophisticated evasion tactics, won’t be the ones caught in the dragnet — everyday users will.
Notably, the Swedish Armed Forces have raised concerns about the law — not because they oppose surveillance, but because they fear the security risks of weakened encryption. In their formal response during the consultation phase, they questioned whether the proposed measures might actually make Sweden more vulnerable to foreign threats. Shortly afterward, they announced they would transition to Signal for their own open but non-classified communications — effectively endorsing the very encryption the government seeks to undermine.
