How the Federal President wants to stop leaks in the FDFA.
During his surprise visit to Kyiv, Ignazio Cassis met with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky.
“Back in Ukraine,” Ignazio Cassis tweeted a month ago, in the early morning of October 20. The Federal President wanted to play Boris (Johnson) in Kyiv: when the British Prime Minister was still in office, he made several surprise appearances in the Ukrainian capital. But interested Switzerland already knew where the Federal President was and what he wanted there. “Blick” tweeted 20 minutes faster than the Foreign Minister himself and went online shortly before 8 a.m.: “Ignazio Cassis is now in Kyiv.”
Detailed information on the course of the upcoming surprise visit was published. Cassis’ staff was furious: “Whoever released this information endangered the security of President Cassis and his delegation,” said a spokesman later. The trip to the country at war, including the meeting with President Volodymyr Zelensky, had been carefully planned for a long time. And she wasn’t safe.
German President Frank-Walter Steinmeier had planned the same thing the same week, but canceled due to security concerns. Back in Switzerland, the Federal Department of Foreign Affairs (FDFA) filed criminal charges against unknown persons.
First there is a leak, then a complaint, but in the end it is mostly forgotten. It is quite possible that this story will end like so many before it: in a footnote of a file of the not always very dense political establishment. So far not much new from the Federal Palace West, where the FDFA is located, among other things.
If the author of the indiscretion is also there and one day should be held accountable after all, he will not be allowed to complain. Because before the ad, EDA boss Cassis tried the gentle way. He wanted to solve the problem without lawyers, “in-house” as one would say today, although in this case one shouldn’t take it quite literally. Markus Seiler, the Secretary General of Cassis, is said to have sent an e-mail to FDFA employees across all wage brackets and the numerous branch offices around the world.
Their content will also end up as a footnote, but as one of the more curious ones. Cassis not only let his employees know that leaks were problematic and that the premature announcement of the trip to Kyiv could have endangered his safety and that of the delegation. He also made the suspected mole an offer: If he got in touch with him, made a confession and, above all, if he apologized to him, mitigating circumstances could at most be claimed. Further west, in the Finance Department, one would speak of an unpunished self-disclosure.
This action by the head of the EDA, who might have been willing to turn a blind eye, was not leaked. Cassis’ Secretary General, a former head of the secret service, practically made it public himself through the wide range of addressees. The details are neither confirmed nor denied by the FDFA, but the pedagogical principle of the procedure is emphasized: “After the indiscretions surrounding President Cassis’ trip to Ukraine, the FDFA employees were sent an email to make them aware of the effects of such a leak can.”
At the same time, “the opportunity” was offered “to apologize for any misconduct”. The announcement followed only after nobody had reported. Meanwhile, some FDFA employees feel they have been placed under general suspicion and point out that people from the federal police and several parliamentarians were also informed. It has not yet been revealed whether anyone in these circles feels addressed by Cassis’ appeal.