Left and Greens do not want any exceptions to rules on arms exports
Published: Thursday, Sep 5th 2024, 09:20
Back to Live Feed
Opinions continue to differ on the rules for arms exports. The conservatives want to give the Federal Council more leeway when it comes to approving arms exports, while the left is critical. This is the conclusion of the consultation on an amendment to the War Material Act proposed by the federal government.
Specifically, the amendment to the law concerns a so-called derogation power: the Federal Council could deviate from the statutory authorization criteria in exceptional circumstances if this is necessary to safeguard foreign and security policy interests. The consultation period ended on Wednesday.
Among other things, the War Material Act prohibits the supply of weapons to countries involved in internal or international conflicts. The federal government now wants to be able to approve exports in exceptional cases even if this is not possible under current law. However, the authority to deviate should only be used if there is not enough time to amend the law.
It is not possible to deviate from the approval criteria for countries that seriously and systematically violate human rights. Exceptions would also be limited in time.
With its proposal, the Federal Council is fulfilling a mandate from Parliament: in December 2023, Parliament called for the introduction of such a derogation power. The SP, Greens and GLP were already opposed to the idea at the time.
However, the history of the project goes back even further: the Federal Council had already wanted to allow exceptions to the legal provisions in 2021 in connection with the counter-proposal to the initiative "Against arms exports to countries at civil war", the so-called corrective initiative. However, Parliament rejected this at the time and the petition for a referendum was subsequently withdrawn.
Left and Greens against relaxation
The opponents of an amendment to the law cited democratic policy reasons, among others: the deletion of the authority to deviate from the counter-proposal was a mandatory prerequisite for the withdrawal of the corrective initiative three years ago, the Greens wrote in their consultation response.
The party is against any relaxation of the rules on war material exports. In the past, the Federal Council has been too quick to comply with the wishes of the arms industry. Too much room for interpretation could tempt it to do so again.
The SP also put forward almost exactly the same arguments. The democratization of the export regulations for war material achieved in the course of the discussion on the corrective initiative was being undermined. A ban on the export of war material to civil war countries and countries with systematic human rights violations should actually be a matter of course for Switzerland.
The Group for a Switzerland without an Army (GSoA) took the same line. It spoke of a "torpedoing of the corrective initiative". In the past, a few words of warning would have been enough for the arms industry to get the national government to relax its restrictions.
The GSoA criticized the Federal Council for arguing that a strict export regime would put the arms industry at a competitive disadvantage. In doing so, it was placing profits above humanitarian values.
Commoners in favor of change
The supporters largely agreed with the Federal Council's arguments. The FDP argued that the arms industry is crucial for national defense. It was also about jobs in the high-tech sector. The Liberals considered the envisaged limits for deviations from the law to be sufficient.
According to the SVP, armed neutrality requires a strong domestic arms industry. As the Swiss market is too small for this industry to be successful in a globalized world, export conditions must be further improved in the future.
The Center supported the amendment to the law, as it had previously supported the motion on which it was based, particularly in light of the war in Ukraine. International developments were not foreseeable when the War Material Act was last revised. However, the Federal Council should only use the power to deviate with maximum restraint and only in favor of democratic constitutional states.
©Keystone/SDA
English 
German 
French 
Spanish 
Arabic