Contents
The views of SVP National Councilor Thomas Matter and Green National Councilor Gerhard Andrey could not be more different: while Matter fundamentally questions the concept of “oligarchs”, Andrey calls for a tougher approach to handling funds from sanctioned people in Switzerland.
One owns a private bank, the other sits on the board of the alternative bank. But when it comes to dealing with so-called oligarch funds, the views of SVP National Councilor Thomas Matter and Green National Councilor Gerhard Andrey differ widely, as was shown in the “Arena” on Friday evening.
With sanctions against Russia and deliveries of war material to Ukraine, the western states are helping to defend Ukraine against the Russian war of aggression. Switzerland’s course is repeatedly criticized. For example, the G7 countries are putting pressure on Switzerland to take part in their task force to implement the sanctions against Russia.
Gerhard Andrey also criticized the actions of the Federal Council in the “Arena”. “If we had actively looked for Russian funds from the start and frozen them more vehemently and created transparency in commodities trading and the financial market, other countries would not always be picking on Switzerland.”
Thomas Matter warned that this was problematic under the rule of law: “We didn’t define the term ‘oligarchs’ correctly.” It is unclear which people would actually be included under this term. For example, there are Russians who have been sanctioned by the EU, but not by the USA. “It seems to me that they want to take away the money from all Russian citizens.”
In the “Arena” everyone agreed that pragmatic solutions were needed to support the people of Ukraine. However, the guests then had very different understandings of suitable options for action.
Abroad, nobody understands why you can’t pass on weapons that you bought twenty years ago.
“If our European partner countries ask for help, you can’t ignore that,” said SP National Councilor Priska Seiler-Graf. Defense of Ukraine is a common task. Switzerland must open a “whole range of possibilities”. It should also be examined how other countries could be allowed to pass on war material that was bought in Switzerland. This would be an option for the SP if a UN resolution states that a country is making use of its right to self-defense.
The FDP also wants to enable indirect arms deliveries for countries with similar standards to Switzerland. “Abroad, nobody understands why you can’t pass on weapons that you bought twenty years ago,” said FDP member of the Council of States Josef Dittli. The non-re-export regulation could also mean that the NATO countries would no longer buy any armaments in Switzerland in the future. This would not only result in the collapse of industry, but also in the disappearance of the security-relevant technology base of the Swiss army.
Our best asset is our humanitarian tradition.
The representatives of the Green Party and the SVP saw things differently. “The SP has wanted to abolish the army for 30 years, and now they suddenly want to deliver weapons,” said Matter. In order for Switzerland’s credibility to be maintained, it must remain constant and neutral, especially in the conflict. Andrey also ascribes a different role to Switzerland: “Our best asset is our humanitarian tradition. We need to get involved in disaster relief and mine clearance.”
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy will address parliament next Thursday. For reasons of neutrality, the SVP wants to stay away from the speech. «Winston Churchill also wanted to give a speech in Bern after the Second World War. They were moved to Zurich, »said Matter. “The policy of neutrality has repeatedly adapted over time. It’s right that we listen to Selenski,” replied Seiler-Graf.