Contents
Berset has been widely criticized after saying he senses a “war frenzy” in “certain circles”. No wonder: he is risking a lot – and doing so consciously.
As Federal President, Alain Berset embodies the entire Federal Council. He rejects indirect arms deliveries to Ukraine. This is what Berset should and must represent to the outside world. He is even free to make it clear that he personally shares this position – which he did in an interview with the «NZZ on Sunday» has done.
But with his statement that he felt a “war frenzy” in “certain circles”, Berset fell out of his role. By leaving it unclear who he accused of war frenzy, he not only snubbed parliamentarians. But also European partner countries.
Switzerland is having a hard time
The government is currently having trouble explaining Switzerland’s position to its security policy partners. Defense Minister Viola Amherd said: Many of the people you spoke to understand that Switzerland cannot deliver weapons directly to Ukraine. But they don’t understand why Switzerland forbids the NATO countries from passing on weapons.
Indirectly accusing the European partners of “war frenzy” in such a situation is unlikely to be exactly conducive to understanding and bilateral relations.
The role of the Federal President can be difficult at the beginning if the Federal Councilor has hardly any contact with other countries. But Berset cannot claim any initial difficulties.
He was always considered a candidate for the foreign department and even passed the diplomatic exam before he began his political career. And he is President for the second time. A role in which he not only liked himself last time, but also convinced many. Berset is not expected to make ill-considered statements on the international stage.
rash? Hardly likely
So when someone like Berset, who is also considered an accomplished strategist, speaks publicly of a war frenzy and says he observes it “in many countries”, that can’t really be an ill-considered statement.
Especially since the Federal President already at the beginning of March in an interview with the Westschweizer Zeitung «Le Temps» spoke of an «ivresse de la guerre». In the “NZZ am Sonntag” he didn’t temper the statement down, but repeated it and also made a comparison with the time before the First World War.
This is only limping because there were no nuclear weapons at that time. The latter are currently forcing western states to show a certain restraint – at least as far as the delivery of offensive weapons or support from ground troops is concerned. And should probably dampen any “war frenzy”.
No specification, no explanation
Berset’s intention is unclear. Did he want to put states like Germany, which are putting pressure on Switzerland with war material, in their place – and switch from the Swiss defensive position to the counterattack? That seems the most plausible. But the strategy is risky, both internationally and nationally.
In the election year, the obvious difference between Berset and the SP leadership is unlikely to help the Social Democrats. Berset almost certainly underestimated the violent reactions his statement would trigger from a majority of Swiss parties, including his own. Nevertheless, he now does what he usually does when he comes under criticism: he says nothing further, refrains from explanations or clarifications.
It is unclear whether Berset also appears in the interview as a pacifist-minded SP Federal Councilor or only as Federal President and whether he is trying to define these roles. But it is also unimportant. Because the statements of a Federal President are now equated with the official position of Switzerland.
As such, they should continue to be talked about – not only in Switzerland, but also internationally. In a situation in which Switzerland, as a neutral state, is already on the sidelines and is accused of opportunism in many places, the Federal President does not make the situation any easier.