Negotiations regarding the third bilateral agreement between Switzerland and the European Union (EU) have been concluded with an agreement. The agreement increases Switzerland’s “commitment” to the EU. To this end, the agreement focuses on reducing state control in energy and transportation sectors, easing regulations on companies and increasing Switzerland’s financial contributions to the EU.
Tolga Dişçi from “Aydınlık Europe”, the supplement of “Aydınlık” newspaper of Türkiye, conducted an interview with Alberto Togni from the Political Bureau of Communist Party of Switzerland.
At the outset, could you briefly inform us about this bilateral agreement? What does it cover?
These new agreements must be placed within the broader and more complex context of economic and political relations between Switzerland and the European Union.
In 1999, Switzerland and the EU signed the first package of bilateral agreements, regulating relations between Switzerland and the European Union in seven areas: the free movement of persons, technical barriers to trade, public procurement, agriculture, research, and air and land transport. In 2004, a second package of agreements (Bilateral Agreements II) was signed, further extending the areas of “cooperation” (I prefer to say Switzerland’s submission to the EU).
“EU wants loosening of workplace inspections”
Since 2008, the European Union has been pushing for a new set of agreements. These have changed in form and substance over time, as we will discuss later, but today they are presented as “Bilateral Agreements III.”
The premise is that no one has been able to directly read this draft of agreements yet, as the government has not published them. Based on what is available, we know that three new agreements will be added to the previous agreements, covering the energy, healthcare, and food safety sectors. Significant changes will also be made regarding state aid rules, which will apply at least to these three new agreements. Moreover, these agreements will introduce the dynamic adoption of EU law. The EU is also asking Switzerland to relax a series of measures regarding worker protections and workplace inspections. Last but not least, Switzerland will have to increase its annual financial contributions to the European Union.
A disaster for workers
While the employers’ union supports the deal, workers oppose. Can you elaborate on this? What does this agreement bring to the Swiss working class? What could be the potential damage?
This agreement would be a catastrophe for workers from every perspective.
If we focus for a moment on the issues most directly related to the labor market, as rightly pointed out by the Swiss Trade Union Federation (SGB), the following problems arise: first and foremost, a deposit currently required from companies—used as a fine in cases of wage dumping—would almost certainly be abolished, thus eliminating both its preventive effect and the possibility of collecting penalties afterward.
“Foreign companies will cut worker wages”
Also at serious risk is a regulation that currently bans 500-1000 companies per year from operating in Switzerland due to particularly severe violations of wage conditions.
Furthermore, European regulations on expense reimbursement would be introduced, allowing foreign companies operating in Switzerland to reimburse meal and accommodation expenses for workers based on the standards of the country of origin, without considering the cost of living in Switzerland. This would result in a significant loss of workers’ purchasing power, not to mention the problematic consequences in terms of housing, health, and safety (where will these workers eat and sleep if they do not receive reimbursement based on Switzerland’s cost of living?). Finally, certain regulations would be relaxed, making workplace inspections more difficult. Overall, this would lead to a weakening of wage protections while simultaneously making it easier for fraudulent companies to enter our country.
Deregulation in electricity and transportation
However, the concerns for workers go beyond just the trade union aspect. These agreements explicitly aim to fully liberalize Switzerland’s electricity market—a policy that, as experience has shown, always leads to speculation and subsequent price spikes, harming workers and small businesses alike. Additionally, they introduce competition mechanisms in the railway sector, a first step toward future liberalization, which has always resulted in service deterioration and worsening conditions for railway workers.
The trade union SGB (Schweizerischer Gewerkschaftsbund) said it supports openness towards the EU as long as workers benefits from it. How can it be beneficial for workers? What do you think?
The SGB – the largest national trade union center in Switzerland – (as well as Travail Suisse, the federation of Christian-social trade unions) has stated that if the measures weakening labor market protections, as well as the planned liberalization of the electricity and railway sectors, remain in place, it will oppose this agreement. The SGB has also collected counterproposals from its grassroots members aimed at strengthening workers’ rights, to counter the labor market deterioration caused by previous agreements with the European Union.
Sovereignty of Switzerland
This “bargaining-up” stance is positive in principle because it indicates that the pro-European faction within the SGB, linked to the Swiss Socialist Party, is not prevailing. Additionally, if nationalist right-wing forces opposing this agreement join with trade unions (as well as our Party), a solid foundation is already in place to defeat this agreement.
That being said, and while I can partially understand why a trade union would focus primarily on wage-related and economic issues, I also want to stress that if one truly cares about workers’ interests, this agreement should be rejected even if these union demands were met. Today, defending the rights of Swiss workers also means defending Switzerland’s sovereignty and neutrality. Other aspects of this agreement, such as state aid regulations and the adoption of EU law, represent another step toward Switzerland’s future accession (incorporation) to the European Union—an entity that is unreformable, that is dismantling democratic processes in its member states, and that, while eroding workers’ rights, simultaneously seeks to prepare them for war against countries fed up with the US-led unipolar world order.
The complete lack of criticism on these issues, combined with certain positions that downplay the negative effects of previous bilateral agreements (which trade unions made the grave historical mistake of supporting repeatedly), reveals a significant limitation in trade union thinking—focused purely on economics and forgetting the left’s commitment to peace and popular workers’ rights. Worse still, it shows the continued presence of the pro-European faction, linked to the Swiss Socialist Party, which has learned nothing from its past mistakes and continues to promote a vision of a progressive, reformable EU that exists only in their dreams. The hope is that the SGB does not give in to this faction and instead firmly rejects this agreement.
There are criticisms that this agreement will undermine Swiss sovereignty and independence. Do you share these concerns?
I completely agree.
Beyond rhetoric, this agreement still includes the adoption of EU law, which, although no longer automatic as in previous negotiations, would allow Brussels, in case of disputes, to drag Switzerland before a so-called “equal” arbitration tribunal and then, if necessary, have the Court of Justice of the European Union intervene. Once a decision is made on the dispute, our country would be left with the choice of either bowing to the EU’s dictates and accepting the new regulations—even if they contradict political will or a popular referendum—or facing sanctions as retaliation.
Given our government’s total inability in recent years to pursue an autonomous and independent policy, it is unfortunately easy to predict which choice they will make.
Moreover, the introduction of a monitoring mechanism on state aid—principally banned in the EU—though it will remain under Swiss control (as it should), still represents a first step toward greater alignment with EU regulations.
Switzerland’s gradual annexation to the EU
Overall, it is evident that this marks another step toward Switzerland’s gradual annexation to the EU, which will strip it of political autonomy, worsen labor conditions, and dismantle public services—all at the expense of democratic rights and social cohesion. This agreement must be fought with all our strength to ensure Switzerland remains neutral and independent, preserving the legal and political framework necessary to implement social and economic reforms that safeguard the well-being of our country and its workers.
These talks started in 2014, the parties met approximately 200 times, but Switzerland broke off the talks in 2021. Why did the talks break down and why are they continuing today?
This third package of agreements was first requested by the EU in 2008, and the initial talks began in 2014. At the time, it was not yet referred to as “Bilateral Agreements III”; worse still, the EU explicitly demanded a comprehensive framework agreement with Switzerland. This was not just about introducing individual agreements in specific areas but about creating a broader legal and institutional framework governing all Swiss-EU relations.
Pro-EU alarmist rhetoric
The Federal Council halted talks in 2021, citing major substantive differences. This was a significant victory for opponents of the agreement, proving that Switzerland could survive perfectly well on its own, despite pro-EU alarmist rhetoric. However, the EU immediately retaliated, for example by excluding Switzerland from Horizon Europe research programs. Added to this is an increasingly tense international climate, which has pushed our political class, increasingly incapable of defending national and popular interests, more and more into the arms of the EU and NATO and which has certainly influenced the resumption of negotiations. This is without forgetting those sections of the sellout bourgeoisie and social democracy that have always demanded that our country join the EU directly.
An act of betrayal
What position does your party take on this agreement and what policy will it pursue in the referendum process?
The Communist Party has judged the outcome of these negotiations as an act of betrayal and yet another demonstration that Switzerland is becoming a colony of the European Union.
For some time now, we have known that the Federal Council—pursuing a foreign and military policy entirely subordinate to NATO and the EU—no longer has at heart the fate of peace and neutrality. However, the outcome of these negotiations shows that the ruling groups are now even willing to surrender legal/institutional mechanisms, the direct democratic practices of our country, and national sovereignty. As we have already stated, we cannot tolerate the adoption of EU law, let alone the interference of “foreign” courts in our political and institutional processes. We also completely reject the logic of blackmail and sanctions, especially—but not only—when applied to decisions democratically voted on by our people.
“Popular and patriotic left against aggressive, anti-social, and warmongering Europeanism”
We share the concerns of trade unions regarding wage protection, working conditions, and inspections (and we go even further, as our Party advocates a complete renegotiation of previous bilateral agreements or, if necessary, even their annulment). We also oppose any further attempts to dismantle public services and liberalize the energy market.
As if this betrayal of both class and national interests were not enough, our country will also be forced to increase its annual multi-million contribution to the European Union—a flow of money that often ends up financing neocolonial practices and privatization in Eastern European countries.
As the Communist Party, we will certainly support any referendum or initiative aimed at fighting these agreements. Moreover, our task is also to put pressure on the major left-wing parties that still believe—out of naivety or opportunism—in a European Union that exists only in their dreams. Most importantly, we want to show the country that there is still a popular and patriotic left that has nothing to do with this aggressive, anti-social, and warmongering Europeanism.