Swiss-EU ties finally find a sense of stability

Our Let’s Talk debate explores the new Swiss-EU bilateral agreement. The treaty, which still needs to be ratified, marks a diplomatic breakthrough and appears tailormade for Switzerland. But political experts Gilbert Casasus and Pascal Sciarini caution that the bilateral approach is not a long-term solution.

After a decade of tumultuous negotiations, Switzerland and the European Union have finally found a way to stabilise their bilateral relations.

On December 20 in Bern, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen hailed what she called a “historic” treaty with Switzerland. On the Swiss side, Foreign Minister Ignazio Cassis was more reserved, saying “the Swiss delegation […] reached its objectives”.

In a recent Let’s Talk debate, Gilbert Casasus, professor emeritus of European studies at the University of Fribourg, told SWI swissinfo.ch that the word “historic” should be used with caution. He feels it does not apply to the new agreement but said the treaty was “fairly positive”, though it does not incite “unbridled joy”.

>> Our article explaining the new agreements:

Pascal Sciarini, professor of political science at the University of Geneva, agreed that the new treaty is not revolutionary: “There has been some progress […] but it’s not an agreement that’s fundamentally different from the one in 2018 that was rejected.” Negotiations over the proposed 2018 general framework agreement were shut down by the Swiss government in 2021.

Casasus believes the framework agreement would – unlike the new bilateral treaty – have marked a new phase of Swiss-EU rapprochement.

“Today, with separate sectoral agreements, we are simply continuing the bilateral logic begun at the turn of the century,” he says. “So Switzerland won in 2024 by avoiding entering a new phase.”

‘A political mistake’

In February, in an interviewExternal link in the newspaper Le Temps, Swiss President Karin Keller-Sutter described US Vice President JD Vance’s speech at the Munich Security Conference as “liberal, in a certain sense very Swiss”.

Her statement proved controversial and contrasted markedly with the outraged reactions of other European leaders. In Casasus’s opinion, Keller-Sutter’s statement was “a political error […] in the context of Swiss international and European policy”.

Sciarini agreed: “Against this backdrop of authoritarian tendencies and the trend towards so-called illiberal democracies, it’s hard to understand what Ms Keller-Sutter has to say about Mr Vance’s remarks.” He feels that, in the future, Switzerland will have to choose a side. “Europe is not only our main [commercial] partner, but it’s also the group with which we share political values,” he said.

Bilateral agreements are not a long-term solution

Both political experts stressed the importance of new agreements between Switzerland and the EU, but they questioned the bilateral path the Swiss government seems to favour. “In the long run,” Casasus said, “it’s a dead end”. He called for rethinking the model, given the current transformation of global politics. “Trump is letting Europe down,” he said, “and Europeans aren’t fully aware of this paradigm shift, this policy shift”.

>> Gilbert Casasus feels we are facing a paradigm shift in world politics:

Sciarini agreed that bilateral treaties are ultimately a “dead end”. He pointed out that the bilateral route was accepted by the EU at a moment when Switzerland had submitted an application for Union membership. “For Europe,” he said, “it was clearly a temporary path to give Switzerland time to join the European Union”.

Importance for Swiss Abroad

A stable relationship between Bern and Brussels is especially important for the 520,000 or so Swiss Abroad living in Europe. They will be particularly vulnerable if the new agreement is not ratified. According to Sciarini, rejection of the treaty might “call into question free movement of persons […] pension schemes, recognition of diplomas”.

>> The president of the Organisation of the Swiss Abroad explains the treaty’s importance for Swiss living in the EU:

Progress but not yet at the summit

Swiss trade unions have warned that the agreement could threaten salary protection. This issue is one of the treaty’s biggest political stumbling blocks. Recently, however, the unions and the cantons have come up with measures that would protect salaries.

Still, Casasus believes wage protection remains a critical issue that could sink the entire project. “There’s been progress,” he said. “You could say it’s like a bike race: we’ve completed a stage, a mid-mountain stage, but there are more Alpine stages remaining, and we haven’t yet reached the summit.”

Social issues, he feels, have “always been the Achilles heel of European policy”. And he believes they could also be the weak point for adoption of the new bilateral agreement.

Sciarini emphasised that without union support, a popular vote on the agreement is bound to fail. “We must succeed in recreating the broad alliance we formed for the [prior] bilateral accords,” he said. This alliance, he explained, must include the left-wing parties, the unions, the liberal-right parties, and the business community.

The right-wing Swiss People’s Party is strongly opposed to the agreement, which it has already denounced as “a treaty of submission”. It claims that ratifying the agreement would amount to abandoning Switzerland’s system of direct democracy.

Sciarini worries that this argument could strike a chord with the electorate, but he maintains it is unfounded. “I don’t see how Swiss direct democracy would be affected,” he said. “On the contrary, […] if a problematic European directive were developed, Switzerland could draw up its own legislation.”

Government support for the treaty will be critical

The treaty’s fate now depends on Switzerland. The Swiss government will have to convince both the parliament and voters to support it. According to Sciarini, a popular vote is unlikely to happen before 2028 for a number of reasons. The definitive agreement will not be published until this spring. The government will then issue its official message before the dossier is submitted to parliament. And the 2027 federal elections will complicate the timing of a referendum. “We probably won’t be ready to hold a vote by late 2026,” he said, “and we won’t want to do it in 2027 so as not to disrupt the elections, so we’ll likely put it off until early 2028”.

Casasus believes that ratification by referendum is a sword of Damocles hanging over the agreement. The outcome of a vote will depend “in part on who’s in the government”, he said. “But beyond the question of individuals, it’s a question of timing. When will the decisive referendum take place [… ] and in what national, European, and international political context?” In addition, for an accord of this kind to be ratified by referendum, it must win not only a majority of the popular vote but also the majority of the cantons.

>> Pascal Sciarini believes the government’s role will be decisive:

Keller-Sutter has already indicatedExternal link that the government will not campaign in favour of the agreement but will instead simply present the advantages and disadvantages.

Sciarini believes this is a poor strategy. The popular vote can only be won if the government supports the project it initiated “unanimously, consistently and decisively,” in his view. As such, the government’s leadership and credibility on this issue will be crucial.

 “Our studies show that among Swiss citizens who are a little hesitant, a little ambivalent – on one hand, there is a desire for the bilateral agreements, but on the other, there is a fear of the consequences,” he says. “Those who trust the government are willing to support the bilateral agreements.”

What is your opinion? Join the debate:

Edited by Pauline Turuban. Adapted from French by Katherine Bidwell/ds