It almost seems as if the fight against the Covid 19 pandemic has also spurred Swiss self-image. In winter, top European politicians pointed the threatening finger at Switzerland, opening the door to the virus with the opening of the ski slopes. It should turn out very differently. Today, “many Germans would look enviously at Switzerland,” writes the leading daily newspaper “World”. There was never a curfew there, and schools and ski slopes remained open after the first wave. Nevertheless, the Alpine republic is no worse off today. The responsible Minister of Health Alain Berset (49) explains the reasons for the Swiss special route in an interview.
In fact, the Swiss Sonderweg was a middle ground with measures that were among the loosest in Europe. At the beginning of the conversation, Berset is “modest” that it is not yet clear in every detail how well the Swiss way worked. Switzerland’s strong service sector also helped, which made it easier to move work to the home office. “Countries with strong industries like Germany,” says Berset, “have a different starting point.”
Nevertheless, the development of the infection curve in Switzerland was sometimes better than in Switzerland, which Berset explains with a “political trade-off”. The “top priority” of Switzerland has always been “to prevent suffering in the broadest sense. This applies equally to the areas of physical and mental health, the economy, culture and social needs. ” The aim was to strike the best possible balance between all areas.
Advantages of semi-direct democracy
He believes it is wrong to weigh up the risks between the economy and health, as has been a priority for many: “If the health of a country is not doing well, the economy is not doing well either – and vice versa.” The more that became known about the virus, the better the Swiss government was able to “find the optimum between personal freedom and necessary measures”.
This allowed a partial shutdown to be ended earlier – the exact opposite of what Germany was doing. Berset draws the comparison to a hike that takes much longer than planned. That could be frustrating for people, not everyone could hold out: “If you want everyone on board, it is better to say right at the beginning that it will take longer and then to cut something back at the end. We worked according to this premise. “
When it comes to fighting a pandemic in Germany, the “world” even speaks of an “infantilization” of its own population, treating people like children, in the course of which more was banned so that no one abused freedoms. That would hardly have been possible in Switzerland, says Berset. The Federal Council relied on its many years of experience with semi-direct democracy: “There is almost nothing that we do not vote on. So we are always in very close contact with the population on political issues. “
Naive October plans
Politicians did not trust science too blindly either, according to Berset. Despite the dialogue on fighting pandemics with the federal scientific task force: “We have by far not simply implemented what science has recommended.” In the end, the responsibility rests with the government. This must find the optimum for society as a whole.
For example, after the first wave, it turned out that schools were not the drivers of the infections. A renewed closure was feared to cause more damage. Mask and test concepts with short, targeted closings in the event of outbreaks confirmed the path taken.
As a mistake, Berset admits that it was naive to think about major events in October without having vaccinations for such plans. “At the beginning of October, the second wave hit us very hard, and of course we stopped everything immediately.” The Swiss vaccination strategy, on the other hand, is a great success: “We have relied on mRNA vaccines from the start and are now one of the few countries in the world that exclusively vaccinate with them.” (kes)