The interlocutors: annoyed. The mood: in the basement. The chances of a solution: bad.
This is how the situation is presented in April 2021. The talks between Bern and Brussels on the framework agreement have reached a temporary low; both sides are outraged by the other negotiating party; both try to blame each other for the – expected – failure of the talks. That says a lot about the broken relationship between the EU and Switzerland – and raises the question of how it got this far.
Squaring the circle
The EU has been pushing for an agreement since 2008. In doing so, she wants to resolve institutional issues such as dispute settlement. Which in turn has to do directly with the Swiss measures to protect wages. For the EU Commission, these measures represent discrimination against European companies; Switzerland denies this. That leaves the problem unsolved. Brussels also wants to regulate the adoption of the Union Citizens’ Directive. Roughly speaking, it is about EU citizens’ access to Swiss social assistance.
But when the Federal Council passed its negotiating mandate in 2013, it laid down the accompanying measures and the Union Citizens’ Directive as “red lines”. It is precisely those questions that are bothering Brussels that should be left out of the negotiations. This is equivalent to squaring the circle. Or a time bomb. It explodes in the summer of 2018.
Injured egos
When Foreign Minister Ignazio Cassis called in June 2018 in view of the faltering negotiations with the EU to find “creative ways” in terms of wage protection, there was an immediate fire in the roof. Union president Paul Rechsteiner yells screams and murder, denounces the Ticino’s solo run; the relationship between the two is permanently disturbed. Along with the SVP, the unions are becoming the most powerful opponents of the framework agreement.
From then on, hardly anyone is interested in what Switzerland got out of the negotiations: that Switzerland should have a say in the drafting of EU law in the future. That the voters can reject any adoption of European law at the ballot box. That in the event of a dispute it is not the European Court of Justice that comes into play, but an upstream arbitration tribunal.
No, it sounds from Bern
Instead, the critical voices in the public debate are increasing and mutually reinforcing. In the SP, President Christian Levrat, to the chagrin of some party colleagues, unconditionally supports the ultimatum policy of the unions. In the middle-class camp, the term “Europe” has almost become a swear word due to the SVP’s long-standing opinion leadership; The People’s Party drives the FDP and CVP with their initiatives against the free movement of persons at will; pro-European voices are increasingly losing ground.
Self-fulfilling Prophecy
The longer the reminders get louder, point out unsolved problems and benefit from the vacuum left by the Federal Council. Because in complete helplessness and lack of leadership, the government can speak neither for nor against the treaty. While the opponents persistently repeat in a kind of self-fulfilling prophecy that the contract has no chance in front of the people.
The result: The debate on the framework agreement degenerates into a navel-gazing inside Switzerland. What the EU wants, where Brussels might be willing to compromise, what Switzerland could offer in return: none of this plays any role in the political arena.
Instead, the opponents of the agreement are constantly discovering new aspects that they dislike. Yes, they even see the most sacred of all cows in danger: sovereignty. It remains her secret how sovereign Switzerland is today, where she is taking over EU regulations one-to-one in the “autonomous follow-up” or has to involuntarily adapt its laws under pressure from the OECD.
Lack of sensitivity
Meanwhile, the Federal Council’s refusal to work in terms of framework agreements fits the desolate image the government offers in European policy.
In communication with Brussels, one misunderstanding follows another. With the same result over and over again: the EU representatives feel offended. Just remember the visit by EU Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker in November 2017. The Luxembourger traveled to Bern for a meeting believing that the agreement would soon be signed. Sunshine reigns at the press conference. But when Juncker is already back in Brussels, he learns from the media: The political leadership in Switzerland does not believe in this timetable.
Head in the sand
If the Federal Council does not try in the next few months to find a deal with creative approaches, the agreement has probably actually died. The opponents may be pleased. But that doesn’t solve anything: The problems with the EU will not just go away if Switzerland ignores them. An ostrich policy may be successful in the short term. In the long term, Switzerland will be better off if it helps to shape its future.