The EEA must be on the table – everything else is window dressing Inquiry against FIFA in Switzerland, the universities fear China – the Sunday news

Ignazio Cassis is constantly in the rain. As foreign minister, the liberal from Ticino can hardly please anyone. This applies in particular to the Europe dossier, in which a new start after the burial of the framework agreement by the Federal Council a year and a half ago is difficult to get off the ground. Therefore, the bilateral path threatens to erode.

State Secretary Livia Leu has held exploratory talks in Brussels, but the start of actual negotiations is not yet in sight. Cassis is also held responsible for this and his motivation for the job is repeatedly questioned. “He hates his department,” said an exponent of a pro-European organization in an interview.

This assessment, made in the summer, may have been a bit premature. Because when the divisions were divided after the Federal Council election, Cassis stayed in the FDFA, apparently because he wanted to. A day before the Federal Council election, an insider had told Watson there would be no surprises and no major castling.

EU hints at concessions

At the press conference following the decision, President Cassis did not appear to have been forced to remain at the State Department. There could be several reasons for this, such as Switzerland’s seat on the UN Security Council in the next two years. And in European politics, Cassis seems more motivated than before.

About a month ago, the European Commission was said to be ready to make concessions on the controversial issues of wage protection and the EU Citizens’ Directive. Switzerland cannot expect too much, as it concerns the free movement of persons and therefore a basic principle of the EU. The Federal Council also decided to continue the polls for the time being.

Persistent block mentality

This was interpreted as a vote of no confidence in Ignazio Cassis. Presumably, however, the decision was simply an expression of helplessness given the lingering blockade mentality from the left and right. The sounding board group, with which the Federal Council is in talks with the social partners, has so far been unable to change anything.

Domestic resistance was the main reason for the unilateral break-off of negotiations on the framework agreement. Since then there has been no real movement. The unions seem to have dug deep into wage protection. That is why the question arises whether Switzerland should explore other avenues.

Various advancements

There have been several advances and food for thought in this direction in recent weeks. The occasion was the 30th anniversary of the vote on Switzerland’s accession to the European Economic Area (EEA) on December 6, 1992. After an extremely violent and emotional vote, the electorate narrowly said no.

These activities are an expression of deep frustration in the pro-European camp at the lack of progress following the failure of the framework agreement. The Federal Council itself has added fuel to the fire with the draft of its new Europe report, which was published on 9 December. It shows that the state government has no plan B.

The Federal Council still considers bilateralism to be the only viable option for Switzerland. A return to pure free trade should no longer be a problem with the UK’s Brexit disaster. However, the EU has made it clear that the bilateral agreements only have a future if the institutional issues are clarified.

European elections as a stumbling block

Critics suspect that the Bundesrat wants to postpone the decision on new negotiations until after the elections in autumn 2023. The said FDFA insider softened the conversation and pointed out that, unlike in other countries, parliamentary elections in Switzerland do not lead to a change of government. That guarantees continuity.

However, the European elections in spring 2024 could become a problem, he admitted. After that, a new EU commission will start working in Brussels and Switzerland will probably have other contacts. Once again a restart on field one is imminent. However, in the European dossier, standing still is synonymous with going backwards.

“A Real Liberation”

That is why the EEA option, which seems to have been ticked off for a long time, should be put back on the table. It would be “a real liberation that could ensure economic access to the internal market for decades to come,” write Nicola Forster and Andreas Schwab in their book. In her view, accession would be “a confident step out of an impasse”.

But self-confidence is a problem in Switzerland’s relationship with the European Union. It is characterized by the well-known swing between arrogance and inferiority complexes. What Christoph Blocher wrote in a contribution to the Forster/Schwab book still rings true for many: “We’re not right for each other.”

The EEA debate is overdue

But what’s the alternative? Switzerland is already feeling the effects of a relationship that has been shelved. Industry and universities are loudly complaining about exclusion from the Horizon Europe research programme. The lack of an electricity or energy contract is also increasingly seen as a disadvantage by the industry.

This is another reason why the EEA debate prompted by the GLP is coming too late. Everything else is window dressing and denial of reality. Accession to the EEA naturally entails the risk of conflict with direct democracy, which was a major problem 30 years ago. And whether the resistance of the trade unions can be overcome is the question.

conflicting population

The Federal Council rejects EEA membership in its Europe report. It would bind Switzerland “in a disproportionate way”. The FDFA insider indicated he was prepared to accept a degree of domestic resistance in future negotiations with the EU. That would at least be progress.

By remaining in the State Department, Ignazio Cassis has effectively committed to finding a viable solution for Switzerland with the EU. It will not be easy, because the attitude of the population is and will remain contradictory, according to the JRC study. People want nothing to do with the EU, yet they know they can’t live without it.