Sweden is regarded to be one of the most active nations in committing to human rights and international treaties. However, they have yet not ratified ILO 169 – an international treaty set to promote the rights of indigenous peoples. By combining elements from a discourse analysis with a postcolonial perspective, this study aims to make visible Swedish discourses regarding ratification of ILO 169. This will enable an analysis of the hierarchial power relation between the Sami and Swedes. Discourses of Swedish politicians, during a debate on the subject of ratification, are critically studied in order to analyze underlying meanings and ambitions. Using Carol Bacchi’s approach ”What’s the problem represented to be”, several conclusions were made. Although claiming ratification being an ambition, is it possible to suppose the opposite. A possible self-interest, international criticism and a lack of interest were elements, hidden behind motivating other solutions rather than ratification, that could reveal a colonial relationship.