class=”sc-97fd9fa8-0 jNFKxv”>
On Wednesday afternoon, the National Council will discuss the relaxation of rules on the transfer of Swiss-made arms to third countries. It is the second time in three days that the subject has been discussed under the dome of the Federal Palace.
In concrete terms, the Grand Chamber decides on a motion from its Security Policy Committee (SIK-N). Accordingly, the Federal Council could exceptionally authorize the re-export of arms manufactured in Switzerland.
This would be possible in two cases. Or if the UN Security Council establishes a violation of the prohibition of the use of force under international law. Or, if the UN General Assembly does so with a two-thirds majority. The latter happened in the case of the war in Ukraine.
Not compatible with the law of neutrality
Proponents of the initiative argue that Switzerland depends on all states respecting the prohibition of violence in the UN Charter.
The Federal Council deems the motion incompatible with the law of neutrality. Whether she has a chance in the National Council is an open question. A minority of the preparatory advisory committee is also against. In addition to representatives of the SVP and the Greens, the Vaud FDP national councilor Jacqueline de Quattro also voted against the initiative.
International pressure is mounting
Switzerland is coming under increasing international pressure. The renowned Wall Street Journal denounces Switzerland. She is a “stumbling block” to Western support for Ukraine. There was also criticism from NATO boss Jens Stoltenberg (63). “The Ukraine case is not about neutrality,” Stoltenberg said last month. “It’s about respecting the right of self-defense, protecting the rule of law and defending the UN Charter.”
European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen (64) also said that Switzerland had to position itself: “Law or force, democracy and fundamental rights or autocracy”, she is quoted in the “Wall Street Journal”.
Federal President Alain Berset (50) has shown skepticism in response to requests from Germany and the Czech Republic to buy back Leopard 2 tanks. Swiss law does not allow any leeway here. The discussion is perfectly logical and normal at this point, Berset said in New York on Tuesday. The framework conditions could be changed by Parliament and are currently under discussion.
However, Berset immediately imposed restrictions: «Weapons export is not possible as long as we have a legal framework in Switzerland. (…) For the government and the Federal Council, we must and want to maintain this legal framework and work within this framework.”
The Council of States rejected Burkart’s proposal
The Council of States had already considered the re-export of arms on Monday. He said no to a motion by FDP chairman Thierry Burkart (47). The State Council of Aargau demanded that a non-re-export declaration can be waived if arms are supplied to states that are committed to Swiss values and have an export control regime similar to that in Switzerland.
The discussion will not be closed even after the debate in the National Council. Several parliamentary initiatives in this area are currently under discussion in parliament. The overview:
Restriction of declarations
About a week after the National Council Committee, the Security Policy Committee of the Council of States (SIK-S) decided on its own initiative. She wants non-re-export declarations to be valid for only five years for certain countries. These include Germany, France, Italy and the US. The list in the appendix to the National Ordinance on War Material is leading. According to the Commission’s initiative, the target countries must undertake to transfer the material only under certain conditions. Among other things, the country of destination must not be involved in an armed conflict unless it exercises its right of self-defense under international law.
The combined approach
Two weeks ago, the SP and the FDP reached agreement in the Security Policy Committee of the National Council on a parliamentary initiative that combines the proposals of the small chamber with the principle of being based on United Nations resolutions. Consequently, the Bundesrat could exceptionally limit a non-re-export declaration to five years in individual cases. Namely, if the country of destination does not seriously violate human rights, there is no risk that the war material will be used against the civilian population and if the country of destination is not involved in an internal or international armed conflict. However, the re-export of arms to a belligerent state would be possible if it exercises its right of self-defense under international law – and this is determined by the UN General Assembly by a two-thirds majority or the UN Security Council. According to the proposal, the amendment would also apply retroactively. (SDA/brother)
Source:Blick
I am Liam Livingstone and I work in a news website. My main job is to write articles for the 24 Instant News. My specialty is covering politics and current affairs, which I’m passionate about. I have worked in this field for more than 5 years now and it’s been an amazing journey. With each passing day, my knowledge increases as well as my experience of the world we live in today.
