Summer break between Bern and Brussels – but behind the scenes the strings continue to be pulled

Even during the holiday season, a lot is going on between Switzerland and the EU. The Austrian EU parliamentarian Lukas Mandl is responsible for relations with Switzerland in the “Committee on Foreign Affairs”. In the “Sonntagsblick”, he has recently commented on the question of negotiations between Bern and Brussels. According to him it is “five to twelve” if an agreement is to be reached before the EU elections in June 2024.¹ – Economist Rudolf Walser, who has retained his critical intuition even as a former senior consultant at Avenir Suisse, reports on how “academia” is trying hand in hand with the federal administration to steer Swiss public opinion towards EU integration.
  Furthermore, Christoph Eisenring, economics editor of the “Neue Zürcher Zeitung”, explains with astonishing frankness what he and many other economic liberals are really after when it comes to closer ties with Brussels: the “opening of markets” for the benefit of certain corporations. – On the other hand, the president of the pharmaceutical association, Matthias Leuenberger, is more down-to-earth in the Swiss sense. – Meanwhile, Federal Councillor Albert Rösti is proving in Rome that Switzerland does not need a framework agreement 2.0 with Brussels, but rather more intensive cooperation with neighbouring countries.

“Happy Hour of Free Speech”

In his “Happy Hour of Free Speech” at the EU Parliament on 10 July, Lukas Mandl discussed “new dimensions of cooperation” between the EU and Switzerland.² Without having been there, one can roughly imagine the discussion. The speakers were, on the one hand, EU Commissioner Maros Šefčovič and EU Parliamentarian Andreas Schwab, both known for their authoritarian approach to Switzerland, and on the other, the two Swiss Eric Nussbaumer and Alec von Graffenried. Nussbaumer is a member of the National Council (Social Democratic Party) and President of the (New) European Movement Switzerland (NEBS) (its motto: “EU accession is and remains the most sensible option for Switzerland”³), von Graffenried is Mayor of Bern and President of the NEBS section Bern!
  Consequently, no one was there who could or would have explained to the EU politicians why we Swiss, by a large majority, do not want to annex our country to the EU or to another power bloc (NATO). Lukas Mandl dismisses as “populism” that we don’t want to submit to the jurisdiction of the ECJ and plays the wise guy: “Every business school student learns in first grade that a common market needs a common jurisdiction.” (Sonntagsblick, 23 July 2023) In reality, Switzerland is, for good reasons, precisely not a member of the EU internal market (the electorate rejected EEA accession), but a contractual partner of the EU (Bilaterals I and II as well as the 1972 Free Trade Agreement with many other treaties).
  Mr Mandl and other EU representatives would be well advised to have knowledgeable Swiss people explain to them the comprehensive direct democratic decision-making rights of the Swiss people, the sovereign. The people not only elect their authorities, but also decide in the Confederation, in the cantons and in the municipalities on amendments to the constitution and laws as well as on substantive business, and even on tax increases. For example, a federal referendum is held on every 0.1 % increase in value added tax. The Federal Supreme Court is not a constitutional court that could declare federal popular or parliamentary decisions invalid, because the legislature, i.e. parliament and, as the last instance, the voters, are the supreme power of the state.
  Anyone who knows even that much about the Swiss state system will realise that the adoption of EU law and decisions of the European Court of Justice in principle are incompatible with the Swiss understanding of the state and its foundation, the citizens’ will for freedom and independence.

When everyone agrees
in advance – is that science?

Something similar to this political “discussion” often happens at so-called academic events. For example, the Europa Institut of the University of Zurich held a seminar on “European Integration: Perspectives and Challenges” on 13 June, “with the kind support of the Federal Department of Foreign Affairs FDFA”.⁴
  The list of speakers consisted “largely of EU-friendly Swiss and foreign experts”, says former Avenir Suisse consultant Rudolf Walser.⁵ Among the Swiss professors, the eternal EU turbos Matthias Oesch and Christa Tobler stand out. Also present as President of the Zurich Europa Institut was Markus Notter, former member of the Zurich government (SP), an EU fanatic even then. Also present was a representative of the EU Commission and Patric Franzen, representing the FDFA, who praised the Federal Council’s “tailor-made bilateralism”, including the adoption of EU law and ECJ rulings as well as the state aid scheme. Probably the only rock in the wall was the constitutional and European law expert Prof. Andreas Glaser. As Rudolf Walser notes: “Since EU-sceptical experts were absent and critical questions were unwelcome, the conference proceeded in great harmony.” Is this the science we as citizens expect from our universities?

“Why we are so rich”⁶ –
a reminder to us Swiss

With his advertising drum for the “opening” of the still relatively good Swiss public service to corporations from the EU area, NZZ economics editor Christoph Eisenring reveals why neoliberal media like the “Neue Zürcher Zeitung” are pushing for a close link between Switzerland and the European Union.⁷
  Eisenring’s basic assumption – “The wealth of nations is based on competition” – is only partially true. For the wealth of nations should actually be based on their natural resources and the work they do. The countries of Africa, whose mineral resources have been exploited for centuries and are still being exploited today by the Western (neo-)colonial powers without adequate payment, recently demanded emphatically at the Russia-Africa Summit in St. Petersburg that they not only supply lithium or cocoa, but also want to produce and sell batteries or chocolate themselves.
  It is also not true for Switzerland that it owes its good economic condition to global competition, as Eisenring claims. It is exactly the opposite: the small state of Switzerland and its economy are also well positioned in global competition. This is thanks to the unique strengths of the Swiss model: High degree of sovereignty and independence from power blocs, including the maintenance of our own currency; high reputation as an impartial, reliable country thanks to neutrality and our stable political system; direct democratic decision-making rights and citizen control over financial and personnel grievances; small-scale economy based on federalism and communal autonomy; extraordinarily flexible and innovative companies, especially the SMEs rooted in the country (more than 99 per cent of companies based in Switzerland have fewer than 250 employees). A central role is also played by the unique Swiss dual vocational training system, to which the SMEs, but also the “real” large Swiss companies such as Swiss Post or Migros, contribute.
  But beware! Christoph Eisenring’s remark: “Switzerland is gambling away what has made it successful” is true today in a highly alarming way, but in a different sense. If our authorities and mainstream media continue to recklessly put the pillars of the state at risk and want to annex our country to the EU and NATO, the good state of the economy and thus the prosperity of the Swiss population may also rapidly decline. The situation is aggravated by the disastrous restructuring and dismantling of Swiss primary and secondary schools. Unless we provide our children with a good education again, a central basic prerequisite for all areas of life, including a successful economy, will be missing. This is already having a severe impact today.
  Boundless competition of large corporations or citizen-friendly public service?
  Eisenring reproaches us Swiss for being unwilling to “open up” our public services to EU corporations, i.e., to privatise them, out of “fear” of more competition. Reading the three examples he presents actually makes every hair stand on end – not out of fear, but because most of us Swiss want to continue to put the common good first.

Example 1: “A pinch of competition on the railways”.
First of all, it is about the admission of “FlixTrain”, which “wants to serve the Munich-Zurich route”. In reality, it is not only about the Munich-Zurich route, but about interference by foreign corporations on a currently unknown scale in the very well functioning Swiss public transport. SRF News confirms this: “One of the EU’s wishes is that in future the railway market should be open not only to SBB but also to foreign railways. A declared pilot project for this is a green FlixTrain, a low-cost provider from Munich to Zurich.”⁸ According to www.flixbus.de, the Flix Group is “a global mobility provider” that has “become the market leader in many regions with FlixBus” and has “created Europe’s largest long-distance bus network in a very short time [in just ten years!]”. FlixTrain has also been offering ”a continuously growing range of train connections” since 2018.
  For the Swiss population, the fundamental question is whether we want to leave the SBB and the other public transport companies to be sold off to the highest bidders. The employees of the state-owned transport companies fear “that wage protection for employees in Switzerland will be undermined”, says Matthias Hartwich, President of the transport workers’ union SEV on SRF News. In addition, “the reliable timetable of the SBB [...] will come under pressure if foreign providers can travel to Switzerland”.
  The “pinch of competition” in Swiss public transport is thus turning out to be an actual surrender of the public service, combined with knock-down prices at the expense of quality and safety and with wage pressure for the staff of the transport companies. Fortunately, the people have the last word!

Example 2: Doctor’s visits across Europe?
Swiss health insurance companies only pay for services provided in Switzerland. Christoph Eisenring states: “Here, too, the opening of national borders could lead to quality and cost competition that would benefit patients.” Eisenring puts it more concretely: “Why not go to Vorarlberg for psychotherapy or to Hamburg for prostate surgery if the quality is good there?” And the patients should then regularly fly to Hamburg for follow-up treatment?
  Eisenring continues: “Conversely, patients from the EU could visit Swiss hospitals, which would help improve their capacity utilisation and provide them with additional income. In fact, foreigners have been seeking treatment in Swiss hospitals for a long time, but only those who can pay their bills themselves as private patients. The assumption that health insurers in EU countries would pay their citizens the high Swiss doctor and hospital rates is absurd!

Example 3: The never-ending story of the allegedly necessary electricity agreement with Brussels.
This issue has already been dealt with several times in Current Concerns. Here it is in brief: NZZ editor Eisenring joins the chorus of those who claim that without an electricity agreement Switzerland would be cut off from the European grid. Yet, as is well known, the centre of the European electricity grid lies in the Alpine transit line through Switzerland. The neoliberal EU turbos, however, are concerned with something else: “If one wants to conclude an electricity agreement with the EU, one would have to allow foreign competitors – and introduce freedom of choice.” But do we really want that? The electricity suppliers of our communes or cantons are committed to the common good, whereas for Eon or Electricité de France the supply of the Swiss would certainly not be in the foreground when electricity becomes scarce – with or without an electricity agreement.

Swiss Pharma President
keeps his feet on the ground

Matthias Leuenberger, country president of the pharmaceutical company Novartis for Switzerland and president of the association of the chemical-pharmaceutical industry scienceindustries comments on the relationship between Switzerland and the EU in a newspaper interview.⁹
  The pharmaceutical industry spends seven billion francs a year on research, and 90 percent of its products are exported. In the meantime, only about half of this goes to the EU, but it is understandable that Leuenberger, as the representative of the pharmaceutical companies, wants “regulated relations with the EU”. But the Swiss entrepreneur keeps his feet on the ground. Asked what concrete problems his industry will face “if no solution is found with the EU, for example if the agreement on the mutual recognition of products expires in a few years”, he answers: “Quite simply, Switzerland will become more expensive as a production location than other countries. Suddenly, multiple controls and inspections will have to take place again that are not needed today.” Leuenberger adds: “That’s annoying, but I wouldn’t say it’s an absolute killer criterion.” He continues, “I don’t want to paint the devil on the wall either. Switzerland would still be a good location with many advantages. But the advantage over other countries would diminish.” [emphasis mw]
  Let’s keep in mind: Switzerland is “a good location with many advantages” precisely because of its still relatively high degree of independence from the EU. That is what annoys the bureaucrats in Brussels. Even if they cap Switzerland with sanctions that are contrary to the treaty, our companies will have more hassle, but they will still have “an advantage over other countries”. Because they have always been adjusting to having to cope with the realities of the world that surrounds little Switzerland.  •

¹ Rauch, Raphael. “Zoff zwischen Bern und Brüssel. ‘Die Schweiz gehört sofort zu Horizon zurück’” (Quarrel between Bern and Brussels. “Switzerland belongs back to Horizon immediately”), in: Sonntagsblick of 23 July 2023
² https://www.lukasmandl.eu/der-schweiz-bericht-geht-ins-finale-mit-eu-kommissar-maros-sefcovic/
³ https://www.europa.ch/themen
⁴ https/www.eiz.uzh.ch/EIZ_Seminarprogramm_Europa-Tag_3.pdf
⁵ Walser, Rudolf. “Schweizer Professoren huldigen Brüssel”(Swiss professors pay homage to Brussels), in: Die Weltwoche of 6 July 2023
⁶ Book title by Rudolf H. Strahm
⁷ Eisenring, Christoph. “Plötzlich haben alle Angst vor Wettbewerb: Die Schweiz verspielt, was sie erfolgreich gemacht hat” (Suddenly everyone is afraid of competition: Switzerland is gambling away what has made it successful), in: Neue Zürcher Zeitung of 7 July 2023
⁸ Strasser, Matthias. “Verhältnis Schweiz-EU. Eisenbahner befürchten teilweise Marktöffnung” (Switzerland-EU relations. Railway workers fear partial market opening), in: SRF News of 15 June 2023
⁹ Schäfer, Fabian and Feldges, Dominik. “Unsere Firmen sind hier in gewissem Sinn gefangen. Sie können nicht einfach weg” (Our companies are trapped here in a sense. They cannot simply leave). Interview with Matthias Leuenberger, Präsident of scienceindustries and Novartis Switzerland, in: Neue Zürcher Zeitung of 27 June 2023