Carl Bildt was first in the whole world to accuse East Ukraine rebels for the deed, but never presented any evidence. And neither was asked for it by the docile Swedish media. Here is one exception.
By Marcello Ferrada de Noli
Interviewed by the Swedish TV, Foreign Minister Carl Bildt stated in absolute terms, “Of course Russian separatists were behind the shooting down of the Malaysian MH17″. “Of course” Bildt did not provide any evidence for his xenophobic statement. Bildt did exactly the same (and so exactly the same non-reacted the Swedish media) when Ukraine Nazis sat fire the Odessa Trade Union building and burn alive 90 Ethnic-Russians. He blamed “Russian gangsters of course” for the crime.
But neither the Swedish media – after a month of Bildt’s aggravating accusation – have asked him for such proof. I have previously analyzed this docile consensus regarding the non-questioning of Swedish authorities on matter of foreign policy. 
In an article on Swedish main paper DN of 17 August 2014 (“Consensus reigns, silence in this house, the house of Swedish media“) columnist Johan Croneman confirms that in nowhere the Swedish media have published any “alternative hypothesis” to that sustained by Carl Bldt (which became the official version of Sweden, following USA’s early official version). The journalist affirms that “Carl Bildt was first in the whole world to point at guilty ones, but without any evidence at all”. In fact, Croneman had once timidly asked Bildt for such evidence; but just for the mere fact of asking the Foreign Minister such question, Croneman received a rain of critical emails from his Swedish colleagues, according to his report!
However Croneman in his DN “protest” article does mention the New Strait Times publication [full text linked in New findings suggest Malaysian Airlines MH17 was shot down by Ukraine SU-25 fighter-jets.], on that “perhaps” MH-17 was shot down by another aircraft, he restraints himself to report further known evidence documented world all over (see links below). Instead, the DN article put it this way: “former AP-journalist Robert Parry” (the only name mentioned in the article) has follow-up the story”, “based nevertheless on anonymous sources”. This, despite all the articles, blogs and documentary videos available in sites such as YouTube, which concretely give the names and professional status of the international experts that put forward the “alternative hypothesis” – as Croneman and Swedish DN calls the truth after one month of silence. Shame to Swedish media.
 Johan Croneman, “Konsesnsus råder, tyst det är i huset, mediahuset”, DN 17 Aug 2014.
 M. Ferrada de Noli. Human Rights Issues in Sweden VS Assange. Chapters “
Analysing The Swedish Phenomenon Of
Political Consensus” page 78, and “The SwedishMedia Paradox And The Case Against Assange” page 83. Libertarian Books – Sweden, 2014.