In an emergency, the Swiss armaments industry would be forced to refuse supplies to its customers. An adjustment of the War Material Act is mandatory. The SVP has to jump over the shadows: neutrality as an excuse only helps the left.
The explosion in Przewodow was an accident, but also a warning. In a war between NATO and Russia, Switzerland should not be a troublemaker, but needs maximum freedom of action – and also partners.
That News portal of Radio Lublin reported soberly what had just happened on that dull November afternoon on the Polish-Ukrainian border. The terror reads between the lines. It could have been the ticker in a war between Russia and NATO:
November 15, 2022, 5:54 p.m.: An explosion in the village of Przewodow in the Hrubieszow District killed two people. The incident happened around 3:40 p.m. near a grain dryer.
The all-clear followed in the morning. With a probability bordering on certainty, the Ukrainian surface-to-air defenses had missed a Russian missile. The defensive projectile hit Poland and killed – tragically enough – two people. The explosion in Przewodow was an accident, but also a warning.
Complacent denial of reality
For weeks, the Russian army has been shelling Ukraine’s critical infrastructure with cruise missiles, rockets and loitering drones. If a missile flies too far and hits a neighboring NATO country, the allies must exercise maximum restraint to prevent an escalation. In the case of Przewodov, the United States immediately did everything to ensure that the temperature did not rise any further.
Poland and the Baltic states in particular, which are in the immediate vicinity of the war, have not yet recovered from the mental wounds of Soviet oppression and violence in the 20th century. A Russian hit, even if it was unintentional, triggers strong emotions – with consequences for the rationality of political decisions.
If the alliance case according to Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty were to be declared after an incident, all member states would have to go along with it. Germany, France and Italy are in an armed conflict with Russia – even without direct combat operations. Suddenly the war would be right on the Swiss border: on the Rhine, on Lake Geneva and on Lake Langen.
Switzerland is neither politically nor legally prepared for this. For too long, politicians in Bern only read the geopolitical fair weather report. There is no real preparation for an escalation of the war. Thinking in scenarios is almost frowned upon by important decision-makers in administration. The political parties prefer to look for the unique selling proposition for the election campaign than for serious solutions.
The tightening of the War Material Act is an example of this self-satisfied form of denial of reality. Last year, Parliament wrote the exclusion criteria, which were previously regulated in the Federal Council ordinance, directly into law: If a state is involved in an armed conflict, foreign transactions are not approved. This also includes the ammunition for weapon systems that have already been delivered.
Criticism from the NATO Secretary General
In plain language this means: In an emergency, Swiss armaments companies can no longer supply their customers with supplies. This is now causing justified nervousness in Germany. One of the largest buyers of Swiss ammunition is the Bundeswehr. The German armed forces currently have no alternative suppliers for certain projectiles.
At the same time, the Bundeswehr has some catching up to do: an investment of 20 billion euros is expected to fill the ammunition depots to some extent. Against this background, it also explains why the German Rheinmetall group is apparently questioning Switzerland as a location.
Criticism is now also coming from the NATO Secretary General: “Swiss ammunition can save lives in Ukraine every day,” said Jens Stoltenberg in an interview with the NZZ. Switzerland must take this statement seriously, even if it in concrete is about a slightly different object.
Stoltenberg refers to the 12,400 rounds fired by the Gepard anti-aircraft tank, which has been causing polemics between Switzerland and Germany for weeks now. Upon delivery of this 35mm ammunition, a declaration was signed prohibiting re-export. Therefore, the German government cannot pass this remainder on to Ukraine.
The reputation of the Swiss export industry is at stake
The situation is similar with twenty Swiss-made Piranha 3 infantry fighting vehicles that Denmark wanted to deliver to Ukraine. The armored personnel carriers would have been particularly well suited to counter-offensives with infantry formations. But in this case too, the non-re-export declaration prevented a NATO country from supporting the Ukrainian army in the fight against Russian aggression.
It is clear that neither Germany nor Denmark can disregard existing treaties – neither can Switzerland. Anything else would be implausible from a constitutional as well as political point of view. It contradicts the categorical imperative to criticize Russia for violating international law, but to scratch laws yourself. It is therefore a mystery why Berlin nevertheless asked Bern whether an exception could not be made for Ukraine.
Because the War Material Act not only regulates the export of armaments, but also their re-export. The FDP President Thierry Burkart is therefore demanding an adjustment in view of the war in Ukraine. In a Motion he proposes that countries with comparable export controls no longer need to issue a non-re-export declaration. The Federal Council does not want to burn its hands even with this small change and – discouraged – lets Parliament do its thing.
The bourgeois parties should seize this opportunity: to unite in the interest of Switzerland’s security and credibility. Doubts about the reliability of Switzerland – from Germany and Denmark of all places, two top customers of the armaments industry – damage the reputation of the entire export economy. In an armed conflict, the most important partners must be able to rely on Switzerland: These are above all its military neighbors, NATO and especially the USA.
The law of neutrality is not an obstacle
Therefore, a fundamental revision of the War Material Act is needed. In principle, re-exports and, above all, exports of Swiss armaments to democratic constitutional states must be possible. There are measurable criteria, such as participation in internationally agreed control mechanisms such as the Wassenaar Agreementwhich also includes provisions on dual-use items.
The SVP has to move, otherwise it will help the left to completely destroy the armaments industry in Switzerland. Even if the sector only accounts for a small part of Switzerland’s economic output, it enables know-how transfer for the army: for example in the development of a digital planning and situation tracking system. Especially with the rapid development of technology, this is crucial for all players in the Swiss security network. Just staying on the ball with dual-use goods is not enough.
In the past, Switzerland’s security was a central concern of the SVP. That’s why the neutrality initiative shouldn’t be a reason to drop the armaments industry. No matter how neutral Switzerland should be, it has to be secure. Contrary to what is often claimed, the law of neutrality does not directly prohibit private trade in war material. According to experts, the principle of equal treatment applies to state-owned companies.
No conflicts with partners in case of war
RUAG Switzerland could not deliver Mörser 16 to Ukraine without responding to a Russian request in return. The interpretation of the experts in international law and parts of the administration in Bern that this also applies to private companies as a result of the state regulation of arms exports should be reconsidered.
In addition, it is largely up to Switzerland itself to interpret its self-determined neutrality within the framework of customary international law. After Finland and Sweden applied to join NATO, it has become practically unique. Austria and Ireland are hardly comparable. Both countries are members of the EU and handle neutrality on a case-by-case basis. In 2021, Austria let US ground troops march through on the way to Southeast Europe during the “Defender Europe 21” exercise. This would not be possible for Switzerland. But the pressure is increasing.
The controversy surrounding the cheetah ammunition is a foretaste of possible conflicts with the most important partners if the USA fails to nip an escalation in Eastern Europe in the bud. It is therefore in the country’s very own interest not to stick to a fair-weather position when it comes to the export of armaments. In a war between NATO and Russia, Switzerland should not be a troublemaker. On the contrary: it needs maximum freedom of action – and partners.