A Swiss company wants to participate in a large German tender of 100,000 stationary multispectral camouflage equipment for the Bundeswehr. The catch: The company’s production facility must be on the EU territory, it means the tender.

The company thinks a mistake. The European free trade association Efta with Switzerland, Liechtenstein, Iceland and Norway was probably forgotten. It is addressed to the Federal Office of Equipment, Information Technology and Use of the Bundeswehr.

This is followed by the disillusionment: the Efta states had not been forgotten. They were deliberately decided in favour of a production facility in the EU. One will not deviate from that.

Letter explains German “Lex Switzerland”

A short time later, a letter from Germany to the Federal Armaments Armour Armour Armament Armours found, which “Le Temps” reported on. The Federal Office, which is under the responsibility of the Federal Ministry of Defence, wanted to avoid an effect as in the case of ammunition for the cheetah air failure, which is under the responsibility of the Federal Ministry of Defence. A production facility in the Efta states has been deliberately excluded. The multispectral camouflage equipment was one of the central technologies for the Bundeswehr. In addition, they would have to be able to pass on to a partner country in the event of war.

With the letter to the hickhack between Germany and Switzerland, the German Federal Office referred to around 12,000 shots for the cheetah flight anti-aircraft armor. Germany wanted to pass it on to Ukraine. It had bought it in Switzerland, it needed the country’s blessing because of a non-re-re-export statement. For reasons of neutrality, she said no.

The letter is proof that there is a “Lex Switzerland” in Germany: the country no longer buys arms products from Switzerland. Arms head Urs Loher formulated it drastically at “Le Temps”: "Switzerland is no longer trustworthy for Germany. In the German parliament, for example, “Swiss Free” is apparently used in the same breath as “China Free.”

Parliament has already decided in the Netherlands not to buy any more arms from Switzerland. Similar considerations are also available in Denmark and Spain. It is not yet clear in the VBS whether the German letter is a shot in front of the bow or just the beginning. Civil derivable blame

In the case of the bourgeois parties, the situation ensures mutual recriminations. “We are definitely destroying the Swiss arms industry,” says FDP President Thierry Burkart. The left had been working on it for decades with the tightening of the War Material Act. “The SVP is now their enforcer, because with the misinterpretation of our neutrality, it prevents the transfer of defence equipment from European states to Ukraine.”

Burkart had submitted a motion in 2022, in which he called for a non-re-export declaration to be completely waived if the delivery to states which were committed to our values. “It has nothing to do with neutrality if other countries want to support each other with weapons that they bought in Switzerland years ago.”

The SVP passes the hot potato to the middle. “The damage caused the defects to the war material law,” says President Marcel Dettling. “The middle thing about it is due to it with its hat and hott: it intensified the law with the left, but wanted to return after the war has become.” Without tightening, the export competence would have remained with the Federal Council. “This policy lacks longevity.”

The People’s Party had been opposed to an increase in the law, but then had no exception to Ukraine, because it was not prepared to deliver in war zones. “Now we are offering a hand that countries that have purchased armaments in Switzerland may be able to export them again after a period of five years.”

The center takes the government to its duty. “The Federal Council may authorise the export of weapons purchased from Switzerland to other countries, based on Art. 184 and Art. 185 of the Federal Constitution,” says President Gerhard Pfister. “The general increase in the arms export law still allows this. But the SVP FDP Federal Council does not want to do that.” And Parliament has not yet succeeded in finding a solution that was capable of majority.

Pfister counters the SVP accusation with a counter-question: “Why is it now fighting against the deliveries of protective vests for reasons of neutrality, but wants to allow the re-export of weapons?”

The Swiss company now wants to produce in an EU country (aargauerzeitung.ch/lyn)