Neutral Switzerland

The Federal Department of Defence, Civil Protection and Sport (VBS(Link is external)) does not mention that new fighter jets only make sense in conjunction with NATO, writes Stefan Schmid of CH Media.

Stefan Schmid, editor-in-chief of the newspaper association CH Media (including the Aargauer Zeitung, the Solothurner Zeitung, the Luzerner Zeitung, the St. Galler Tagblatt, the Thurgauer Zeitung, the Urner Zeitung and several other titles), takes the statement of a NATO man literally: “The Swiss Air Force is dependent on NATO – without cooperation it would be “blind, deaf and deaf.”

Stefan Schmid writes in his analysis: “In the run-up to the vote of 27 September, it is once again high on the agenda: the story of a neutral country that has to defend itself in the midst of Europe and surrounded by NATO states. – Switzerland should be able to defend itself “as independently as possible” of other states or organisations in the event of a military attack.

These sentences are at the top of the website of the Department of Defence (VBS). And they are repeated at every opportunity by supporters of the new warplanes. Only: There can be no question of independence. It is obvious that the beautiful story of the defensive, neutral small state does not correspond to reality in the 21st century. Without NATO, Germany would be “blind, deaf and defenceless,” Wolfgang Ischinger, head of the Munich Security Conference, said a year ago, referring to the danger of an American withdrawal from Europe. By comparison, Germany’s defense spending is about ten times higher than that of Switzerland. And yet the following applies: it is not possible alone.”

Neutral Switzerland

Stefan Schmid continues: “The statement of the top German diplomat therefore applies to Switzerland one-to-one, as research shows. “The idea of a defense that is as autonomous as possible is a joke,” says a Swiss engineer who has researched the fighter jet industry. The VBS hides technological and strategic dependence on NATO for reasons of neutrality policy.

Instead of making the extent of international cooperation comprehensible to the population, they are accused of wanting to operate as independently as possible. It is clear that Switzerland’s defence begins at Europe’s borders. And it can only be ensured in conjunction with neighbouring countries.”

Neutral Switzerland

So how to vote on 27 September?

The analysis of the prominent CH Media man from St. Gallen is remarkable. What he means by the “borders of Europe” in the phrase “the defence of Switzerland begins at the border of Europe” remains in the dark.

Shocking, however, is what Stefan Schmid writes in his Comment which he attached to his analysis:

“Switzerland does not need new fighter jets because it has to defend itself. They are needed in order to ensure the security of Europe in solidarity with neighbouring countries. A classic composite task. Too much is weighing on the shoulders of the US. Europe must take more responsibility. And Switzerland is part of this Europe. Neutrality does not stand in the way. It means that we do not want to start wars or participate in them unless we are attacked ourselves. Moreover, it no longer has any meaning.”

Editor-in-chief Stefan Schmid thus pleads a) for the purchase of new fighter jets and b) for the integration of the Swiss army and air weapon into the (US-dominated) NATO – for the economic relief of the USA.

Does Stefan Schmid even know what NATO is?

NATO’s goal is not defence

Anyone who has looked at NATO’s history knows it: NATO defines itself as a defense alliance – as most war ministries call themselves defense ministries. But the reality is different: NATO has never repelled an attack anywhere, but it has intervened several times in other countries against its own principles. It is precisely in these days that we can once again see in Ukraine how NATO operates, deliberately byusing its own “constitution”.

Ukraine President Volodymyr Selensky has given the army’s Special Operations Force a new chief: General Hryhoriy Halahan. The Kyiv Post writes on 27 August:

“Ukraine’s Special Operations Force was established at the beginning of 2016 as a new stand-alone military unit, supported mainly by the US, Estonia, Lithuania and the United Kingdom. The highly classified formation force aims to move away from the ancient traditions of the Soviet SpezNas (Special Unit of the Intelligence Service; Red.) and to create a modern special operations force that is fully in line with NATO rules. It declares the implementation of highly sensitive operations in the fields of intelligence, psychological warfare and counter-terrorism as its priority area.”

And the “Kyiv Post” continues:

“Many experts describe the unit as Ukraine’s fastest-developing branch of service as part of the 2020 Defense Reform, which aims to achieve full compatibility with NATO. Since 2020, the force has been equipped with capabilities for operations on the ground, at sea, in the air, as well as in cyberspace. – In June 2019, the 140th Ukrainian Special Operations Centre, based in Chmelnyzky, was certified by NATO and approved for deployment by the NATO Response Force (NRF), the multinational military formation regularly maintained by the alliance in a high readiness to respond to immediate threats.”

That is NATO. Because, according to its statutes, it cannot accept Ukraine as a member because of its civil war in Donetsk and Luhansk, it simply works closely with the Ukrainian army outside of membership and “certifies” the Ukrainian “Special Operations Force” according to NATO criteria!

Switzerland in the NATO network?

Does Switzerland really want to be in association with this NATO – not least today, not before 1991, when everyone was afraid of the Communists? We, neutral Switzerland? And should Switzerland really buy new fighter jets for six billion Swiss francs to ease the economic burden on the US?

To be neutral and at the same time wanted in the NATO alliance: We want to welcome schizophrenic Switzerland to the club.