Bern eases arms export restrictions

Context

In brief

• The Federal Council calls for a revision of the War Material Act
• Popular vote on 29 November
• Every export requires SECO authorization
• The proposal concerns exports and re-exports

Key facts

• Subject → revision of the War Material Act
• Date → 29 November
• Control → SECO authorization for every export
• European countries → 17 of the 27 EU member states
• Other states mentioned → United States, Canada, Australia, Japan, New Zealand and Argentina
• Stated objectives → defense capability and jobs

The vote and the new scope

On 29 November, the Federal Council is calling for approval of the revision of the War Material Act, one of the items on the agenda of the next popular vote. The stated objective is to ensure the country's defense capability and safeguard jobs.

According to Keystone-ATS, it is currently forbidden to export Swiss war materiel to countries involved in internal or international conflicts. Since the beginning of the war waged by Russia against Ukraine, Bern believes that the Swiss arms industry has become unattractive because of the strict rules and is under heavy pressure.

On this basis, the bourgeois majority in Parliament wants to grant the Federal Council, under certain conditions, greater room for maneuver regarding exports and re-exports. The revision aims to facilitate the transfer by Western countries of material purchased in Switzerland to third countries, if compatible with Switzerland's neutrality and foreign and security policy interests.

The bill also provides for a Federal Council veto. In the presence of security or neutrality-policy concerns, the executive could require the weapons to remain in the purchasing country. In exceptional circumstances, and to protect foreign or security policy interests, it would be possible to deviate from the current authorization criteria, while respecting international obligations.

Another change is the abolition of the systematic requirement for purchasing states to request Swiss approval before transferring the material to another country. Seventeen European countries out of the 27 EU member states are listed, as well as the United States, Canada, Australia, Japan, New Zealand and Argentina, among others, with export regimes similar to Switzerland's. Requests would be authorized in advance even in the event of armed conflict.

The referendum committee fears that the reform would make sales or transfers to authoritarian regimes or regimes that do not respect human rights possible, reducing Swiss control over re-exports. Guy Parmelin rejects this interpretation: every export would remain subject to SECO authorization and comply with neutrality law, human rights and other international obligations.

The DEFR presents the reform as a tool for ensuring greater flexibility in foreign policy during exceptional crises and strengthening the arms industry as the foundation of national defense. Simon Plüss, head of the Export Controls and Sanctions division at SECO, explained that the revision would make it possible to export to the United States components for the F-35s that Switzerland has decided to purchase, if they are not directly intended for combat use.

Operational details

What would change for the Swiss system

The comparison between the current rule and the proposal

The practical difference is the leeway granted to the Federal Council, not the disappearance of controls. A veto would remain possible and every export would continue to require authorization from SECO. The novelty mainly concerns destinations, re-exports and exceptional crises.

The first effect considered by Bern is industrial. Strict rules have made the Swiss arms industry unattractive and subject to pressure; greater flexibility is linked to national defense and jobs. For employment data, see aziende che assumono.

The case of the United States makes visible the difference between the current regime and the proposed one. Today, new authorizations are not possible because Swiss rules are stricter than the law of neutrality. The revision would instead open up the possibility of exporting components for the F-35, but subject to the limitation that their use not be directly intended for combat.

For the Western countries that have purchased materiel in Switzerland, the change would concern the next step: it would no longer be necessary to systematically request Swiss agreement for each transfer to a third country. However, the Federal Council's veto and the possibility of requiring that the weapons remain in the purchasing country would remain when concerns arise about security or neutrality.

The limits to flexibility would remain international obligations, the law of neutrality and respect for human rights. For this reason, the position of the referendum committee and that of the Federal Council describe two opposing assessments of the same mechanism: on the one hand, the fear of losing control over re-exports, on the other, the guarantee that SECO authorization would continue to apply to every export.

Useful tools to protect your net income

To reduce FX leakage, compare CHF-EUR exchange options and banks for cross-border workers.

Key points

How to follow the dossier before 29 novembre

Five verification steps

To read the proposal without confusing the rule currently in force with the possible one, it is advisable to follow a precise sequence.

1. Mark 29 novembre. The revision of the War Material Act is among the items in the popular vote indicated by the source. The date distinguishes the current framework from the political decision on the revision.

2. Start from the rule currently in force. Today, Swiss war material cannot be exported to countries involved in internal or international conflicts. This is the point of comparison for assessing every proposed change.

3. If you analyze a re-export, distinguish the transfer by a Western country to a third country from the final destination. Also check whether it is a state with an export regime similar to Switzerland's: the proposal mentions 17 European countries out of the 27 in the EU, as well as the United States, Canada, Australia, Japan, New Zealand and Argentina.

4. Check the counterweights. Even with the revision, exports would remain subject to SECO authorization. The assessment should comply with the law of neutrality, human rights and Switzerland's other international obligations.

5. Isolate exceptional situations. The Federal Council could exercise a veto, require that the weapons remain in the purchasing country, or deviate from the current authorization criteria for foreign or security policy interests. In the case of the F-35, the stated condition is that the components not be directly intended for use in combat.

In the political comparison, keep the two positions expressed in the source separate: the referendum committee fears transfers to authoritarian regimes and a loss of control; the Federal Council denies that this is a blank check. Those following the dossier for work can supplement their reading with the annunci di lavoro. To delve deeper into the personal economic side, use the calcolatore stipendio.

Source: swissinfo.ch