In October 2013, the Swiss People’s Party proposed a referendum to implement immigration quotas. Embodying anti-immigration and anti-E.U. sentiments that contradict the traditionally pro-immigration European Union, the Swiss People’s Party cites Switzerland’s inability to maintain its influxes of immigrants as justification for the measure. More specifically, supporters of the Swiss People’s Party harbor growing concerns over foreign workers taking Swiss jobs, as well as migrants benefitting from Swiss welfare. In an interview with the HPR, Mark Halle, the executive director of the International Institute for Sustainable Development, discussed how the Swiss People’s Party reflected the “popular concern [that] the influx of Islamic immigrants and difficult-to-employ migrants from developing countries,” not the “Norwegian with a Ph.D.,” would cause more bad than good for Switzerland.
Even though he believes these “scapegoat issues” are irrational and is personally against the referendum, Mr. Halle thinks that many other European countries such as Britain and France would have voted similarly—indicative of the growth of anti-immigration sentiments in Europe. Nevertheless, on February 9, 2014, the referendum passed by a narrow 50.3 percent majority vote—not uncommon, given Switzerland’s longstanding tradition of direct democracy. Legitimacy within Switzerland is, for the most part, not a concern. However, even though Switzerland is not a part of the European Union, the passage of the referendum has triggered a slew of repercussions that suggest a greater European uneasiness.
The Euro and the Guillotine
Historically, Switzerland has been an isolationist country. But amidst the general trend of European integration, Switzerland has gradually assimilated with the rest of Europe. However, rather than joining the European Union, Switzerland gained a de facto membership by negotiating agreements with European nations asserting the free movement of capital, goods, and people. Such arrangements have had their advantages, as Switzerland enjoys nearly all of the benefits associated with E.U. membership, without having to cede the core of its fiscal autonomy. This system has worked relatively well; it has broken down traditional trade barriers within the European continent that elongated economic turmoil, while bringing a sense of unity to the continent.
Because Switzerland is only a de facto member of the European Union, there are fewer legal repercussions for implementing immigration restrictions. Switzerland cannot lose the E.U. membership it never had, but it has violated a set of bilateral agreements. Amongst other things, these agreements ensure the free movement of people, knowledge, and agriculture within Europe. Although Switzerland still has three years before the quotas will be effective, there is much speculation as to how the entire process will unfold. Alex Glennie, a senior research fellow at the Institute of Public Policy Research, told the HPR that the “guillotine clause” will come into effect once Switzerland implements the quotas. This clause, a crucial qualifier of the bilateral agreements, asserts that the violation of one tenet of the agreements means violation of all of them. Consequently, Ms. Glennie suggests that there is a possibility that additional “counter moves by the E.U.” will jeopardize economic relations in the process. On the other hand, Mr. Halle believes that the European Union and Switzerland will reach some sort of compromise that will exempt E.U. citizens from any quotas.
Though Switzerland and the European Union still have three years to sidestep the guillotine clause, Brussels has already taken action to punish Switzerland. Within a couple weeks of the vote, the European Union ejected Switzerland from participation in the Erasmus student exchange program and Horizon 2020. These measures have isolated students and universities. “Financial aid is a small part of Erasmus,” Swiss student Andrina Brunner stated. “I received 230 euros per month, but many students only have the Erasmus program for exchange and they’re in trouble now.” Studying abroad is a large part of Swiss education. In an interview with the HPR, Dr. Felix Moesner, the director of Swissnex Boston/Consulate of Switzerland, stated, “Switzerland has the second highest per-capita ratio of researchers and students going abroad.” In the European job market, many students view studying abroad as simply being a “part of their package” to help them stand out. Increasingly, companies want diversity, so the ability to show experience internationally either in the form of work or study is extremely helpful. But because six of the top seven nations for Swiss study abroad are in Europe, students once planning to study abroad via Erasmus will have to rethink their educational paths. Though this apparent punishment implemented by the European Union appears to be relatively minor, it is the manifestation of a tension that could eventually erupt and affect more significant European issues such as trade, capital flows, and immigration.
“A Bad Example”
The Eurozone has only slightly hinted at these larger worries, as Europe has only threatened to impose commercial trade barriers against the Swiss. However, because Switzerland’s treaties regarding commerce are ensured via separate free trade agreements and other linkages with the European Economic Area, there are no legal EU issues with imposing these barriers. If trade ties were completely broken between Switzerland and the rest of the Eurozone, Switzerland would be isolated but also insulated from the European Union. They would suffer severe disadvantages in international trade, but would be free to make their own policies. Thus, the conflict is between national sovereignty and international unity. However, once one country favors the former at the expense of the latter, it raises questions about other nations in the area. In Britain, for example, anti-E.U. sentiment has swelled to the point of contemplating a 2017 referendum on whether or not to stay in the European Union. Furthermore, Germany has grown weary of continuously dragging weaker European nations out of their fiscal issues. Clearly, Switzerland is not alone in opposing the obligations put in place by the European Union.
Using Switzerland’s referendum as a rallying cry, the anti-immigration, anti-E.U. parties of the far right in other nations are gathering steam ahead of the European Parliamentary elections to be held in May. As the likes of the Austria Freedom Party and France’s National Front piggyback off of Switzerland’s inward-looking vote, their chances of gaining more influence in the European Parliament and their own national legislatures increase. These movements in international politics reflect the European Union’s fears that Switzerland’s referendum will bode ill for the European Union going forward. Elaborating on these fears, Gerhard Schwarz, the Director of Avenir Suisse, said in an interview with the HPR, “The European Union fears that Switzerland could become a bad example for member states because of its direct democracy and its desire to control migration.”
Furthermore, as modest economic growth and even more modest inflation plague Europe, dissatisfaction will only increase. If this unrest persists, a slew of possibilities emerge. Countries may replicate Switzerland’s immigration quotas. Once immigration is cut, restricting goods is the next logical step. Without economic integration, fiscally stable E.U. nations may take a hardline policy toward fiscally weaker E.U. nations, forcing them to service debts they cannot pay in full. If all the cards were to fall into the right, or wrong, places, this seemingly small instance of protectionism would spiral into a dangerous cycle of protectionism and a breakdown of the European Union.
These questions are purely meant to ignite thought and to spur conversation. They are not meant to claim the impending doom of the European Union, but rather to assess the presence and potential impacts of the issues plaguing a fragile alliance. To isolate the Swiss referendum as a one-off instance that will quickly be brushed aside is to avoid its symbolic affront to Europe’s relatively young tradition of integration and liberalization.
Although Switzerland is not a part of the European Union, its actions influence the continent. Although it has been several months since the referendum passed, it is nevertheless important to consider the forces that pushed it forward and the potential implications that it could have for the Eurozone as a whole. No matter how democratic and how legitimate, violated agreements are no small matter; they require us to think through the ways in which other sovereign nations and the organizations to which they belong will react and reciprocate.
Image credits: Amnesty International, www.free-project.eu
© 2024 Harvard Political Review. All rights reserved.