8/16/2019 2010-01-19-walther-en

1/4

Rudolf Walther

Swiss self−defeatism

The Swiss vote to ban minarets has less to do with a "populist factor" inherent inreferenda than with resentment at high−level corruption and the fear of socialdeclassification. Celebrated by rightwing parties across Europe, the vote augursmore popular Islam−baiting to come.

On 29 November 2009 the Swiss electorate was called upon to vote on aninitiative that wanted to ban, with immediate effect, the construction of minarets. Moreover, it was proposed that the ban −− a mere detail of buildinglaw −− be written into the constitution (!). What barely anyone thoughtpossible then happened: the 57 per cent of citizens that took part in thereferendum voted in favour of the ban (the turn−out was 53.4 per cent of allthose eligible to vote). The double majority, that of the 26 cantons, was alsoeasily reached. Only the three French−speaking cantons −− Geneva, Vaud andNeuchâtel −− along with Basel, the only cosmopolitan city inGerman−speaking Switzerland, voted no.

The entire Swiss elite, up in arms about the "PR disaster", insinuated that thedecision was without precedent; yet this was to obscure the true background.Although the supposedly "civil" citizens did indeed opt for a highly sovereignself−defeat, it was according to the motto: "What's good enough for those uptop is good enough for those down below".

Over the course of many years, the Swiss political and economic elites havebeen undermining their own "civility" with their struggle to retain bankingsecrecy on behalf of tax evaders of all calibre. It began already in themid−1990s, with the "orphaned" Jewish accounts in Swiss banks. Only afterpressure from the US administration and Jewish interest groups was it possibleto persuade the Swiss elites that this murky past finally needed to beinvestigated. That then happened with a 40−strong commission led by theSwiss historian Jean−François Bergier, which published its findings in 2002

(supplemented by over two dozen special reports). Flying in the face of national lies and the sophistries of school history lessons, the Bergiercommission made it clear that in the Second World War the Swiss elites didhave room to manoeuvre, which in some areas −− for example in business −−they took full advantage of, but which in refugee policy they quite consciouslydid not.

In 1997, after a report about dormant bank accounts in Switzerland, theHolocaust Fund was set up, furnished by Swiss banks and the National Bankwith 100 million franks each, and by the business sector with 73 millionfranks. 309 000 living victims, above all in eastern Europe, Belarus and theUkraine, received payments from the funds.

An article from www.eurozine.com 1/4

8/16/2019 2010-01-19-walther-en

2/4

However anyone who might have supposed that the Swiss elites were any thewiser after their image had been damaged thus, soon realized their mistake.When, two years ago, the US and the EU began investigating tax evasion moreclosely, they came across the same old stubbornness from Swiss banks andauthorities, which wanted to retain the fine difference between tax evasionpunishable by a fine and that punishable by a prison sentence, so as to protecttheir dubious customers worldwide. In short: with so much slyness among

those up top, the resentments of those down below should come as no surprise.

Alpine chauvinism

Of course, the referendum was not about minarets, of which there are a grand total of four in Switzerland. Thecampaign rode on the back of antipathies towardsMuslims and Islam, mobilizing the old Alpinechauvinism against foreigners in the context of theeconomic crisis and rising unemployment. Thecampaign, designed by the German "creative" (adman, inother words) Alexander Segert, had clear racist features,especially one poster which shows a woman in a burqastanding next to seven minarets, sprouting out of a Swiss

flag like rockets that are apparently threatening the country.

Apart from Swiss People's Party (SVP), led by Christoph Blocher, and acouple of far−Right sects, all parties, all churches, and all trade unions andbusiness associations were against the ban. Hence the result of the referendumis indeed a sensation. The defeat is particularly embarrassing for theparliament, which rejected the initiative with a 70 per cent majority, yet agreedto the referendum result despite the minaret ban being in clear breach of theconstitutional guarantee of religious freedom and ban on discrimination. Notlegally necessary, this parliamentary agreement was the result of pureopportunism, as well as a fear of ruling an SVP initiative to be

unconstitutional. Because in Switzerland there is, for logical−systematicreasons, no constitutional court −− in a direct democracy, the people have thelast word −− the decision will now be made by the European Court of HumanRights in Strasbourg.

Joining the celebrations of the self−righteous Swiss chauvinists in their victoryover reason and tolerance is a pan−European, international radical rightwingparty with branches in, among other countries, Austria, Italy, France and theNetherlands. Roberto Calderoni, a Northern League MP in the Berlusconigovernment, immediately announced what was on the rightwing agenda inItaly: "Yes to church steeples, no to minarets." Similar sentiments come fromthe FPÖ and BZÖ in Austria, who both demand a Europe−wide ban. In the

Netherlands, Geert Wilders, leader of the "Party for Freedom", announced thatthe Dutch would also have the opportunity to vote on a minaret ban. Buoyedby this success, the Swiss initiators declared there would also be referenda on"arranged marriage", "honour killings", and "burqas" −− in short, the completeprogramme of popular Islam−baiting, which is also on the increase inGermany.

Demonstrations in Zürich and Bern of several hundred, mostly young peoplewith banners such as "Embarrassed to be Swiss" are small comfort comparedto the fact that in 15 cantons between 60 and 71 per cent voted for the ban.Adding to the miserable result, on the same day a motion to ban the export of military equipment was voted down by a majority of over two−thirds (in the

An article from www.eurozine.com 2/4

8/16/2019 2010-01-19-walther-en

3/4

8/16/2019 2010-01-19-walther-en

4/4

real threat to the unity of the country. The referenda of recent years, however,show that the divide is becoming ever wider. Switzerland is isolating itself inEurope, with this decision lowering the minimum civil standards of legalityand tolerance. By entering a building law into its constitution, the country hasmade itself as ridiculous as when the white wine lobby constitutionalized a banon Absinthe in 1908. It remained in force for 97 years and was only lifted in2005. One does not need to be a prophet to forecast that the ban on minarets is

unlikely to last that long. The predictable slap in the face from Strasbourg willruin the image of the country completely.

Switzerland's reputation as a free and democratic country is over, it seems. Inthe warmest November in living memory, winter descended in the Alps. Inpolitical terms, the Ice Age could last a long time for Swiss politics.

1 The  Personenfreizügigkeitsabkommen, signed with the EU in 1999, allowing non−Swissnationals to reside and work in Switzerland −− trans.

Published 2010−01−19

Original in GermanTranslation by Simon GarnettContribution by Blätter für deutsche und internationale PolitikFirst published in Blätter für deutsche und internationale Politik  1/2010

 © Rudolf Walther/Blätter für deutsche und internationale Politik © Eurozine

An article from www.eurozine.com 4/4