In ‘The Arena’, representatives of the parties discussed whether Switzerland should allow the export of war materials to Ukraine – and what that means for neutrality.
The head of the center, Gerhard Pfister, said in the “Arena” Friday evening, where he met with party leaders, that the delivery of Swiss ammunition from Germany to Ukraine should be allowed. What is happening in Ukraine now has direct consequences for our security situation.
Guests in the “Ring”
- Gerhard Pfistercenter head
- Mattia MeyerSP . co-chair
- Thierry BurkartPresident FDP
- Roger Kopelmember of the party leadership SVP
- Balthasar Glatleygreen president
- Melanie MettlerGLP VP
“Switzerland and its democratic values are also being defended in Ukraine,” Pfister continued. The fact that the Federal Council has so far rejected requests from Germany to supply it with ammunition can be considered a “failure to provide assistance to Ukraine”.
The head of the Free Democratic Party, Thierry Burkhart, contradicted: “According to the current law, it is not possible for the Federal Council to release such shipments.” That would be a breach of neutrality.”
No legal basis
According to Burckhardt, in the future one must consider whether democratic countries with strict arms export rules should be allowed to transfer war materials from Switzerland to other democracies in the event of a conflict.
Melanie Mettler, vice president of GLP, also called for a modification of the arms export regime. Neutrality does not mean having no position or being devoid of value.
This is an existential security risk for Switzerland.
All other parties basically reject exports of war materials to the warring parties. As well as the first vice president. “Switzerland may under no circumstances hand over war materials to a belligerent party,” said Roger Koppel, a member of the party leadership.
Discussion of a “very serious” SVP
If Switzerland delivers war materials to Ukraine via another country, it is circumventing its obligations under the Neutrality Act. This makes them a “war party”. At the same time, she could no longer perform her peaceful function.
There was no integral neutrality of the kind that Roger Koppel demanded.
He calls for an immediate return to “full neutrality”. If Kobel is on his way, penalties will also be blocked. Switzerland is slipping deeper and deeper in this war. “I am appalled by the involvement with which the other parties want to dilute neutrality.”
Burckhardt replied that there was no strict neutrality in Switzerland as Roger Kopel had been demanding. Neutrality is based on international law and has been designed differently in the past.
The supremacy of energy instead of handing over weapons
On the other hand, for the Socialist Party, the question of handing over weapons is a diversion maneuver from the right. The most effective leverage in Switzerland is the financial centre, said Mattia Meyer, co-chair of Switzerland.
“Switzerland is the center of the Russian oligarch’s money, of the Russian commodity trade, and that’s where we must begin.” You can no longer look away. Only in this way can Switzerland make a big difference to the people of Ukraine.
Required legal bases
Green President Balthazar Glatley agreed with her. Glatley said that when Pfister said that the defense of Switzerland was in Ukraine, one could also say that Putin was armed in the canton of Zug. 80 percent of the raw materials trade went through Zug and Geneva.
“This is recognized for filling the war chest.” You need to get away from Russian gas as soon as possible and move forward with energy supremacy. The Socialist Party wants to freeze assets in Switzerland by Russian oligarchs close to Putin and punish them for giving Ukraine reconstruction.
“It is right that these assets benefit the country that the Putin regime has destroyed,” Mayer said. A legal basis must be established for this.