Contents
With the yes to the re-export of armaments, the discussion about Switzerland’s neutrality flared up again. While the conservatives prioritize the country’s security, the left criticize the gun lobby.
In the future, certain countries should be able to pass on Swiss war material after a blocking period of five years – including to Ukraine. Yesterday, the Security Policy Commission of the Council of States (SiK-S) approved a proposal that goes back to FDP President Thierry Burkart and SVP Council of States Werner Salzmann.
“The War Material Act must be corrected. In this way we are strengthening the security of our country,” said Salzmann, who presides over the SiK-S, in the “Arena”. Under no circumstances should Switzerland get involved in the war. But for Switzerland to be neutral, it also needs a defensible army that can act independently. For this they need the armaments industry, which in turn is heavily dependent on exports.
In view of the situation in Ukraine, several parliamentary initiatives are currently calling for the War Material Act to be relaxed. As a result, the debate about Swiss neutrality has flared up again.
limits of neutrality
For SP National Councilor Franziska Roth, Salzmann’s proposal is an excuse to strengthen the arms industry. “People say ‘neutrality’ and mean ‘do business’. I don’t think that’s appropriate in this situation.”
As a compromise, the SP wants to allow a narrowly defined exception in the War Material Act for Ukraine’s self-defense against the war of aggression that violates international law. “It makes sense if we base ourselves on the decisions of the UN,” says Roth. If the UN classifies a conflict as contrary to international law, the transfer of Swiss weapons should be possible.
For Green Councilor Mathias Zopfi, these efforts are incomprehensible: “Only two years after the war material law was tightened, attempts are being made to undermine the law under the pretext of solidarity.” However, the value of neutrality is particularly evident in times of conflict and it is important to remain consistent.
We are in the middle of Europe and we have to show solidarity.
“It is not Switzerland’s role to support Ukraine with weapons – but with humanitarian aid or protecting power mandates,” said Zopfi. In addition, the financing of the aggressor via Switzerland should be prevented.
The FDP National Councilor Maja Riniker sees things differently: “We are in the middle of Europe and have to show solidarity.” It also increases your own security. Riniker therefore supported the original initiative by FDP President Burkart, which stipulates that countries that share Switzerland’s values and have similar export controls do not have to sign a re-export declaration.
According to Riniker, it should also be checked whether stored Leopard tanks from eastern Switzerland could be sold to European countries that in turn have sold tanks to Ukraine. A proposal that the SiK-S rejected yesterday, however.
Great risk of escalation of the war
According to Marcel Berni, a strategy expert at the ETH Zurich Military Academy, the arms deliveries have helped Ukraine to hold onto its territory.
On the other hand, they would lead to an arms spiral: “Ukraine and Russia both want to break up the frozen fronts. They are in a war of attrition trying to bleed the other side dry.” The war harbors a great risk of escalation, with other countries being involved. Unfortunately, an end to the war is currently not in sight.
«We see that the peace dividend is slowly being exhausted and the neutrals in Europe are breaking away. For example, Sweden and Finland are joining NATO,” says Berni. As a result, neutrality in Switzerland, as in previous wars, is again controversial. However, this could also be attributed to partisan interests and the upcoming election campaign.