Author: Maarten Koning

The European Commission has recently taught Switzerland another lesson and shown its true colours. It is making it clear that this ‘monster’ – with its direct democracy and its cantons right in the heart of Europe – will not tolerate any dissent, let alone dare to contradict the EU. And this is only the beginning of the EU’s rule and that of its judges.

Marignano

The Battle of Marignano on 13 and 14 September 1515 brought an end to the Italian expansion of the cantons of the Swiss Confederation. The French kingdom under François I (1494–1547) emerged victorious. After a series of victories over the Habsburgs, culminating in the Peace of Basel (1499), and victories over the Duke of Burgundy (1474–1477), the Swiss Confederation became Europe’s military superpower.

From the beginning of the 15th century, the cantons conquered territories belonging to the Duke of Milan with varying degrees of success. After 1477, conquests in northern Italy followed (Ticino, Bormio, Valtellina, Chiavenna and, in 1512, even the Duchy of Milan). However, the defeat at Marignano also brought the Swiss Confederation back to reality.

Apart from Bern’s conquest of the Pays de Vaud from Savoy in 1536, there were no further foreign campaigns after 1515. The military lesson had been learnt. Modern warfare had appeared, and the Swiss Confederation lacked the political unity to cope with it.

The French king, however, respected the Swiss Confederation not only because of its role against the Habsburgs and Burgundians, but also because he needed this confederation of sovereign cantons as a buffer against the Habsburgs. The Perpetual Peace of 1516 and 1521 lasted until Napoleon’s invasion in 1798. The diplomats and representatives of the cantons were formidable and respected negotiators.

The Peace of Westphalia in 1648 subsequently confirmed the neutral status and political independence of the Swiss Confederation, comprising 13 sovereign cantons. This was by no means a foregone conclusion, but rather the result of lengthy negotiations, during which Swiss diplomats and representatives haggled over every comma and full stop. After all, the devil in international treaties is in the detail.

Credit Suisse

Credit Suisse’s international venture met with a less successful outcome. Various causes can be identified. The crux of the matter, however, is that this sound Swiss bank succumbed to a drive for expansion and overconfidence in a banking world governed by a different set of ethics. The bank’s governance structures and shareholders were still living in the world of the Swiss Confederation before Marignano.

In terms of experience, mindset and legal understanding, they were ill-prepared for the Anglo-Saxon style of banking that prevailed in the years following 1990. That is the main cause of this bank’s downfall, quite apart from the (criminal) liability of the board, governance bodies and the shareholders’ inability to say ‘no’ to absurd bonuses and megalomaniacal plans.

F-35

History is repeating itself with the necessary procurement of modern fighter aircraft, in this case the F-35. The Bundesrat (the federal government) appears not to be the right body to conduct contract negotiations with foreign countries in this competitive world, down to the last detail.

The situation is likely even more serious, and there has not even been a proper examination of the agreement at the highest level. There is no excuse for this, only the realisation that the Bundesrat, those in charge at the ministries and, above all, the members of parliament are not up to this task. Parliament, too, has failed.

Customs tariffs

This also applies to the negotiations with the Trump administration regarding customs tariffs. In spring 2025, an agreement was reached on a tariff of 10 per cent. All that remained was to await the Bundesrat’s approval. However, the Bundesrat took so long to respond that the unpredictable and impulsive president raised it to 39 per cent.

Here too, the Bundesrat has failed. Incidentally, what was the role of, for example, the Minister of Justice, who cannot have been pleased with this favourable outcome of the negotiations? After all, the EU had higher customs tariff, and that did not sit well with this advocate of EU membership.

Bilateralen III and the European Union

What does this say about the proposed treaty with the EU? Bilateralen III is, in fact and in legal terms, a euphemism for limited membership in an international organisation called the European Union. It involves a far-reaching transfer of sovereignty to the EU, and this is only the first step in the proposed accession process.

How many pages of the treaty will the Minister of Justice have read, and is he even competent or interested enough to scrutinise the contents – down to every comma and full stop – and assess all its implications? After all, activism and a European political profile, rather than statesmanship in the service of the country, seem to be his guiding principle.

On previous occasions, at any rate, he has shown no sign of this; instead, activism has taken centre stage. This also applies to other members of the Bundesrat. One female member of the Bundesrat even responded to a question in an interview about the desirability of EU accession with the answer ‘Why not?’ And this member of the Bundesrat is expected to read and comprehend nearly 2,000 pages of constitutional and other legal implications?

The disregard for the mandatory Ständemehr (Federal Constitution, Art. 140b) by a majority of Bundesrat members also points in this direction. Wishful thinking, hope and expectations regarding relations with the EU prevail, rather than the letter and spirit of this treaty or the European practice of ‘pacta non sunt servanda’ and European judges who interpret the law very broadly. Here too, the devil is in the detail.

Conclusion

The above also applies to senior civil servants in ministries and to members of parliament. The lessons from Credit Suisse, the F-35 and recent customs negotiations with the US have not been learnt. On the one hand, there is activism; on the other, there is a lack of political, legal, and administrative insight, knowledge, and experience in complex international negotiations. In both cases, it appears that this key treaty with an international organisation has not been examined with the necessary thoroughness.

The centuries-old, successful Swiss model at the heart of Europe is at stake, not only to Switzerland’s detriment, but also to the EU’s, which will lose a beacon of certainty and stability. After all, Switzerland is not the political, educational, scientific, democratic, economic, monetary, and social problem; the EU is!

500 years ago, in 1526, a disputatio took place in Baden (in what is now the canton of Aargau). On 19 May 1526, envoys, theologians, clergymen, humanists, scribes and printers from the Confederation of the 13 Cantons travelled to Baden. The 200 attendees discussed matters of religious truth during the day’s proceedings. In the disputation, participants sought to assert their views. In contrast to the disputation, a dialogue is merely an exchange of ideas and opinions.

Ever since Martin Luther published his reformatory theses in 1517, there had been debate about the true faith, the sale of indulgences and the Church. The Reformation stance was not the majority view in the Old Swiss Confederacy or beyond.

Various Reformed cantons went their own way within the Tagsatzung. 17th-century painting. Collection: National Museum, Zurich

The disputatio was a format used at medieval universities. Luther initiated the first religious Reformation disputation in Leipzig in 1519. From 1523 onwards, disputationes were already taking place in Zurich and later in other cantons and towns of the Old Swiss Confederacy, as well as in future cantons.

Ever since Luther published his 95 Theses in Wittenberg in 1517, Christian Europe had been divided over the question of true faith and marked by various schisms. Among other things, this led to numerous (civil) wars. Moreover, economic interests also lay at the heart of the Reformation. The often wealthy abbeys and other Catholic institutions were coveted prizes for the rulers of a region.

The disputatio was convened by the Tagsatzung of the Confederation; here is a picture from 1531. Collection: Stadtarchiv Baden/Historisches Museum Baden

 The disputatio

The disputatio was a model frequently employed in Switzerland during the Reformation. It helped to ensure that there were relatively few armed conflicts (1529/1531 and 1656/1712), although the Sonderbund War (1847) should be regarded as a constitutional and religious conflict.

The Simultaneum, the division of the cantons following a referendum, or a relatively tolerant attitude in various cantons (apart from some Calvinist cantons) formed the basis of this development. The Swiss model of compromise, involving citizens and politicians, was already functioning at that time. It was a form of direct democracy which, whilst far from perfect, was already unique in Europe at the time.

Geneva, 25 September 2022, a Referendum

 Direct democracy

Direct democracy means far more than just a referendum. It is a process of communication, involving all strata of society and, above all, citizens and the business community. This is certainly not the case in the EU, let alone the idea that Swiss-style direct democracy could function within the EU. That is ‘fake news’ from the Federal Council.

Even the Dutch Parliament often has no idea about the EU’s legislative process and the many powerful lobby organisations, the corruption and the national interests of (larger) countries. Even when it does, it is all too often outvoted by other Member States or ignored by European judges (on immigration, the euro, fisheries, agriculture, taxation, pensions, social security, etc.).

The first referendum since 1815 (on further EU integration, with 62 per cent against) in the Netherlands was immediately abolished. The EU and national governments annulled referendums in ten other countries.

The result: ever more unrest, riots and resistance against the government in the Netherlands, ever less trust in democracy (or what remains of it in the Netherlands and its ‘corruption à la néerlandaise’).

There can be no question of a ‘Disputatio’, let alone direct democracy, within the EU. At best, there is a dialogue, but European politicians, judges, civil servants and powerful lobby organisations in Brussels and Luxembourg are the ones who decide.

Conclusion

The EU should return to the foundations of genuinely achievable economic integration, namely the internal market, as well as to intergovernmental cooperation in the areas of migration, education, policing, defence, foreign policy and other cross-border tasks.

Switzerland should participate in this international cooperation, including in the field of defence. Circumstances have changed since 24 February 2022 and are no longer comparable to those of the periods 1914–1918, 1940–1945 or 1989.

Whatever the Swiss ‘Lord Haw-Haw’ (1906–1946) and his weekly magazine devoted to the world may say, neutrality today is anything but membership of the European Union.

Times have changed for the Swiss Confederation too. What remains unchanged, however, is what binds a community together. In Switzerland, these are subsidiarity, federalism, decentralisation, and direct democracy, all of which are directly linked to them.

The EU, with its ever-increasing encroachments on sovereignty in taxation, finance, the judiciary, the economy, constitutional affairs, social policy, and education, is incompatible with the Swiss model.

One example of this, amongst others, is the EU’s direct interference in migration and immigration policy. The planned new treaty with the EU not only stands in direct contradiction to the Swiss Constitution, but also symbolises that direct democracy will no longer hold any significance following a referendum.

Germany and the Netherlands are also examples of mass immigration and the ease with which immigrants can obtain citizenship. National politics and the administration of justice are no longer possible. The scale of abuse is enormous, for instance in relation to child benefit, social security payments and family reunification, not to mention rising crime and the emergence of parallel societies.

An employment contract secured through family, friends, clans or the purchase of abandoned catering businesses or other companies can be arranged quickly, thereby enabling the holder to obtain a residence permit.

Furthermore, it is the Court of Justice of the European Union that defines what constitutes an employment contract (a few hours per week), not Swiss judges or the Swiss authorities. On this point too, the Federal Council is disseminating misleading and false information, which can be explained by the ideological and activist stance of some of its members.

‘To be or not to be’ for the Swiss Confederation. Give the EU an inch, and in a few years it will want a mile and Switzerland’s financial resources.

How much longer? The new EU Treaty not only spells the end of direct democracy, but also that of the Confoederatio Helvetica. This democratic, cosmopolitan, open, economic, monetary, social, scientific and innovative jewel at the heart of Europe.