Briton demystifies Swiss politics

Keystone Archive

Clive Church, one of the leading foreign experts on Switzerland, has crowned 30 years of research with a book - written in English - on the Swiss political system.

“The Politics and Government of Switzerland” seeks to destroy the illusion of a sleepy alpine nation where very little happens.

Church – a retired professor of politics and international relations at the University of Kent in England – has written extensively on Switzerland’s history, democracy and relations with the European Union since the 1970s.

Church told swissinfo that he hopes his new book will help explode “the myth – especially in the United Kingdom – that there are no politics in Switzerland”.

swissinfo: Is there actually any call for a book in English on Swiss politics?

Clive Church: Yes, in the sense that nobody can study Switzerland unless there is a reasonably up-to-date and available text. Obviously people have lived quite happily without it.

But to me that [gap] gives a somewhat unbalanced view of Europe.

swissinfo: What do you think a complete beginner to Swiss politics is going to learn from your book?

C.C.: Switzerland is often portrayed as being like a series of somewhat isolated shelves standing out on display. On those shelves are pretty boxes marked federalism, direct democracy and neutrality – and you get the impression that they exist for themselves in a vacuum.

What I hope people will discover from the book is that these are actually channels used by a vibrant and active political system to sort out its own problems.

The Swiss are having exactly the same arguments and the same kind of political divisions as every other European country. They merely process them in a slightly different way.

swissinfo: One of the most striking elements of the Swiss political system is direct democracy. Why is it so important?

C.C.: It’s a reflection of the fact that Switzerland isn’t made up of one group of people speaking one language, with one culture.

Structures have been devised that allow the different language groups, in certain ways, a lot of autonomy. The political system also very much sees the people as sovereign.

swissinfo: Something we hear a lot– certainly from the Swiss – is that their system of direct democracy could be a model for other federal states and even a united Europe. Do you address that in your book?

C.C.: To a certain extent, yes. I think Switzerland’s relations with Europe are actually politically extremely important […] both in terms of external relations and the domestic impact.

There are two things I would say about Switzerland as a model. Firstly I think it’s probably unwise to assume that you can transfer systems willy-nilly from one situation to another.

They usually rest on very different foundations and it’s not as simple as some people think. Certainly I don’t think it’s very convincing to assume that Europe would live happily ever after if only it copied Swiss federalism.

But I think direct democracy has something that may be useful to the European Union. In the draft constitution for Europe there is in fact a provision for a million citizens across the EU to propose a change in policy. That’s new.

But my feeling is that there is a huge difference between Switzerland and the EU – and after May when the EU expands, you will have more countries and far more variant cultures than there are within Switzerland.

The likelihood of being able to have real European-wide political parties is limited.

swissinfo: What do you say in your book about Swiss relations with the EU? Can Bern really afford not be a full member?

C.C.: One of the things I have tried not to do in the book is to tell the Swiss what they should do. That is a singularly ill-advised and fruitless occupation.

Of course Switzerland can stay outside a 25-nation bloc if that’s what the country wants. But the Swiss will pay the price because obviously there will be some difficulties.

The bilaterals seem to me very sensitive and they will be the first real test of how the new balance of opinion in parliament and government, and indeed public opinion is going to work out.

If a deal is done on the extension of the free movement of people to the new member states and then defeated in a referendum, the whole of the bilateral package could go down the tubes.

And I assume that makes it very difficult for the second round of bilaterals to be negotiated. So where you go from there I don’t know. That will be a major problem for the Swiss to sort out.

At that stage the Swiss may decide that the bilaterals, although they safeguard the country’s sovereignty, are not really effective and they will have to bite the bullet and join.

But that’s a decision for them [to take].

swissinfo: You wrote this book before last year’s parliamentary and cabinet elections. What impact have they had on Swiss politics?

C.C.: They obviously changed the balance in a very real way and showed that parliamentary seats really mattered in forming a government in a way people had somewhat forgotten.

Many of people had got used to thinking subconsciously that the Magic Formula was not just a general principle of ensuring the major formations were represented in government.

They thought it meant that the balance that existed in 1959 would be there forever.

Of course the elections disproved that and I think the parties and public opinion found it quite difficult to adjust to that.

There is a new, more robust, sometimes less pleasant form of politics developing.

In the cabinet election no one really seemed to worry very much about the general balance of cantons, languages, or gender in the government. What counted was brute party power. And I think this was very interesting and showed how important the parties were.

And I think all this is actually changing the Swiss political system.

swissinfo: Does that mean that you think the pace of political change here in Switzerland is going to get faster?

C.C: I wouldn’t necessarily say it’s going to get faster. But I am absolutely certain that Switzerland is set for change and I don’t think we ought to see 2003 as another 1959.

I don’t believe there is going to be another 40 years of exactly the same balance in parliament and government as there was after 1959.

How long it lasts, how far it changes is hard to tell. Change there will be, I am certain.

swissinfo-interview: Jonathan Summerton

Church

Biography:
2003 – Clive Church officially retired on August 31, and is now an emeritus professor.
1995 – Awarded a Jean Monnet chair in European integration.
1992 – Promoted to professor.
1981-2003 – University of Kent, England – taught a variety of historical and political courses for the School of Languages and then in the Department of Politics and International Relations.
1965-81 Lecturer in French history and from 1975 senior lecturer in European studies, University of Lancaster, England.
1963-65 Junior lecturer in modern history, Trinity College, Dublin.