Parties disagree on the re-export of Swiss war material
Published: Tuesday, Oct 22nd 2024, 09:40
Back to Live Feed
Recipient states of Swiss war material should be allowed to transfer it to a third country after a period of five years. It should also be possible to subsequently revoke declarations of non-re-export that have already been issued. This also applies to arms deliveries for the war-torn Ukraine. The parties are at odds.
The consultation on a corresponding amendment to the War Material Act ended on Monday. At present, the War Material Act (KMG) prohibits the transfer of exported Swiss military equipment to Ukraine. Requests from European countries, including Germany, which were rejected by the Federal Council, led to discussions about relaxing the ban on re-exports.
The draft of the National Council's Security Policy Committee (Sik-N) envisages ending these discussions with a new article in the KMG. Recipient states of Swiss war material that "share Switzerland's values" should be allowed to transfer it to a third country under certain conditions after a period of five years.
Among other things, a third country must not be involved in an armed conflict unless it exercises its right of self-defense under international law. The Sik-N draft also specifies the conditions under which non-re-export declarations that have already been issued can be revoked. This is particularly important with regard to a transfer by the recipient state to Ukraine.
"Unproblematic in terms of neutrality law"
For the Center Party, the transfer of Swiss armaments by European states to Ukraine is unproblematic in terms of neutrality law, as the party announced. Decency demands that "our value partners should not be unnecessarily restricted in their freedom of action". The majority variant now presented by the SiK-N represents a long overdue compromise that is clearly supported by the center.
For the party, the key point is that the SiK-N proposal would enable Switzerland's international value partners to make Swiss-made armaments available to Ukraine for its defense campaign. According to the center, the amendment to the law also helps to provide a perspective for the industrial base that is essential for national defence.
FDP: "Pragmatic compromise"
The FDP described the draft as a "pragmatic compromise", as it announced. The Free Democrats also emphasized the importance of the Swiss arms industry for Switzerland's security. The refusal to re-export had led to mistrust among European partners. The proposed amendment to the KMG would make it possible to restore the trust of these countries.
Furthermore, the Sik-N variant is in line with international law. Neutrality should not be synonymous with inaction in the face of obvious aggression - such as that of Russia against Ukraine.
The Green Liberals also welcome the Sik-N proposal as a "compromise based on the principles of the UN Charter under international law". In addition to its strong competencies in humanitarian aid and peace mediation, Switzerland should not place any obstacles in the way of states that are committed to the same values and wish to transfer war material acquired in Switzerland to Ukraine.
General liberalization preferred
The SVP, meanwhile, "resolutely" rejects the bill. This is despite the fact that the party, like the Centre Party, considers the relaxation of the War Material Act to be "existential for the continued existence of the Swiss arms industry" in its consultation response. The proposed solution remains a "bureaucratic monstrosity" that goes far beyond the law on neutrality and places an unnecessary burden on all stakeholders involved.
The party is calling for a general liberalization of the article, in line with a minority that was defeated in the Commission. Accordingly, all weapons re-export declarations should have a fixed expiration date and be deleted after five years. According to the SVP, restrictions on individual countries could be interpreted as a violation of the Hague Convention.
The SVP also rejects the retroactive application of the new provisions to non-re-export declarations that have already been issued, as mentioned in the final provisions of the draft. This is inadmissible under the rule of law.
Greens: Contradictory to humanitarian values
The Greens also reject the proposed amendment to the CMEA. According to the party, the Sik-N draft is equivalent to abolishing the non-re-export clause, which prohibits the export of war material to countries with human rights violations. Switzerland's responsibility for exported weapons would also be weakened. This would be "contrary to Switzerland's humanitarian values".
The SP, on the other hand, welcomes the general thrust of the bill. The party is convinced that Switzerland should not prevent its partner countries from passing on war material formerly purchased from Switzerland to Ukraine. However, the concrete implementation of the bill is not satisfactory enough.
This is partly because of the unfavorable wording regarding the determination of the right of self-defense, and partly because the transfer of the war material by the third state to another third state is not excluded.
The SP is therefore calling for a solution to be found that specifically serves Ukraine, rather than an unnecessary opening of the KMG: the aim is to adopt a targeted "Lex Ukraine", not to promote Switzerland as an armaments location.
©Keystone/SDA
English 
German 
French 
Spanish 
Arabic