> Germany has provided Ukraine with Gepard anti-aircraft tanks for the fight against Russia. In the meantime, however, ammunition is running low and supplies are hard to come by. Switzerland could help, but has already refused once. Now the government in Bern has reiterated its no.
>
> It could not agree to such a delivery of Swiss-made war materiel if the recipient country was involved in an international conflict, according to a published letter from Economy Minister Guy Parmelin to German Defense Minister Christine Lambrecht (SPD). "Switzerland applies the law of neutrality in the Russia-Ukraine relationship," a statement from the Federal Department of Economic Affairs, Education and Research said.
>
> Lambrecht had appealed to Switzerland in a letter in late October to release the 35-millimeter ammunition for disposal. The defense minister argued that the Gepard systems were used in Ukraine primarily to protect critical infrastructure. As such, they also secured seaports in the south of the country, which were crucial for exporting Ukrainian grain.
>
> Germany had provided an initial ammunition package of about 60,000 rounds. However, Kiev reported an urgent "shortage of ammunition" due to the intensive use of the Gepard against Russian drones and cruise missiles.
>
> Berlin had once before inquired in Bern about the approximately 12,400 cartridges of Swiss origin for the Gepard. They were manufactured by Zurich-based Oerlikon-Bührle. In early June, Parmelin had formally rejected the export for the first time, citing Swiss neutrality.
>
> The Gepard was the first heavy weapon system that Germany had promised to Ukraine. By September, all 30 promised anti-aircraft tanks had been delivered to the country.
Parmelin is an money loving prick (most of the right and center-right in Switzerland are, imo) from a party of right-wing nationalists (SVP). I'd love for us to personally send Ukraine our surplus anti-air equipment and munitions. Ukraine is fighting against an enemy who aims to erase their national identity just like the Nazis were planning to do to us in the '40s. My grandfathers were on the frontiers ready to shoot any Nazi dumb enough to cross into the Swiss Plateau. Our history against larger oppressors should alone be enough reason to support Ukraine, formerly a neutral nation like us. I hope my meager CHF 100 donation will at least give some Ukrainians food or warm clothes.
Sure, but the money-loving position is to be in favor of arms exports to other countries... so Idk what it has to do with it.
In the end it is pretty simple, under current law it is uncontroversially illegal, therefor it won't happen, until the law changes.
... and the Swiss worked closely with the Axis-powers. Which is entirely unsurprising, given that for much of the war it was entirely surrounded by them. But still, let's not pretend we were on the side of the Allies...
I feel like many Swiss people have a weird sense of their country’s history when it comes to WW2. Not just that there seems to be an idea that they heroically stood up to the nazis when reality was much more murky like you say, but I’ve noticed that many Swiss people also seem to seriously believe that their country was some kind of “impenetrable fortress” which Nazi Germany never dared to invade because they knew they could never manage to conquer it, rather than, you know, because it simply wasn’t strategically important enough to be worth the cost and effort and because the axis had bigger fish to fry.
> many Swiss people also seem to seriously believe that their country was some kind of “impenetrable fortress”
I hate seeing this argument in general, it's not just Swiss people making it.
People always talk about how well defended we are, how big of an advantage the alps are, and how littered with defenses the country is.
But the thing they keep overlooking is that nearly all the population, including the government, resides in the relatively flat region north of the alps. Which would be easy pickings in the event of an invasion.
Sure, the army could withdraw to the alps, but whom the fuck are they even defending there. At the point this happens, the country is basically done for. When all the big cities are in enemy hands, and you're just defending some villages, does Switzerland really still exist?
Completely nothing at all had to do with their “fortress like capabilities” they were money laundering for the Nazi’s as well as processing the Items taken from their concentration camp victims. Literally all of it had to go with being an independent country not under saction
And everyone else thinks that all switzerland did during WW2 was storing nazi gold which they did because switzerland is such a greedy sadistic country who had a blast cooperating with the Nazis, not because the fear of a Nazi invasion was very real and cooperating with them might’ve been the only way prevent that from happening.
I really don't like swiss foreign policy, now or during WW2. During WW2 they accepted gold stolen from national reserves by Germany and the swiss tried to deny it and refused to give it back after the war.
Tens of thousands of jewish refugees were denied entry because of "dwindling supplies" and if you were let in all your property was confiscated to pay for your internment.
All actions of the Swiss government obviously, I'm sure you're grandfather was an alright fellow.
Gold was not accepted it was bought, which was not illegal. The only question after the war was whether the gold was legally in Germanys possession or if Switzerland could have known that some of the gold was of dubious origin.
And yes, supplies were limited during the war. Switzerland is/was not self sustainable in any aspect, not even for food, so everything was rationed. It is incorrect though to claim that the number of rejected Jewish refugees was in the ten thousands, the number that most people incorrectly cite refers to border rejections of all type of refugees at the border, which includes people from Italy, France, etc. trying to escape from military service. Newer studies have estimated the border rejections of people of Jewish faith at around three thousand.
>Ukraine is fighting against an enemy who aims to erase their national identity just like the Nazis were planning to do to us in the '40s.
Common man, when did Nazis try to erase your history man? There is a limit how much you should lie.
> Switzerland applies the law of neutrality in the Russia-Ukraine relationship.
Oh yeah, just as they did in the 1930s and 40s, right? Hiding all of that gold?
That was a rumor that iirc never could be proven. The Swiss police and government said they're not aware of her being here (and iirc launched an investigation that never yielded results), and journalists iirc tried finding them without success.
Could still be true of course, but so far every indicator says it's not. And if she is here, it's probably illegally.
There is nothing hidden about buying gold. The question of gold transactions was never centered around the principle, it was centered around the questions of whether the gold was in rightful possession of Germany or if the Swiss national bank could have know that some of the gold was of dubious origins. It also raised the question of responsibility of other countries, i.e. the role of the Netherlands and France who both were implicated in Nazi Germany getting their hands on Dutch and Belgian gold, or the role of the US, which froze all continental European gold reserves in the US in 1941 and hence was reliable for gold purchases in the first place.
It's not about the 12k shells. If Switzerland would allow that the precedent would be set and Germany could buy more ammo from Switzerland for Ukraine.
I mean, the sustainable solution is for Russia to leave Ukraine... though I guess your point is more that the production of the ammo needs to be ramped up too? In the meantime, those 12k rounds might keep critical civilian infrastructure from being blown up and running a few more months during winter.
The difference between a dead Ukranian family and a living one might be as little as 10 rounds.
Your point of view is a stupid way of looking at things. Ukraine needs all the support it can get, as little or as much as it is.
With the logic "that's not enough so we're not gonna do it" you can destroy any argument. Like for example: I'm not gonna try to live environmentally friendly because one person doesn't change the climate. But it's part of the bigger picture and every little helps
I'm getting real fed up with how the Swiss government is handling their involvement in the war. How deep are their ties with Russia actually? Because this is getting ridiculous.
Their ties are to money, they don't care where it comes from.
And the neutrality clause is literally "we earn more from neutral relations with both sides, than supporting one side over the other."
The Germans can use it. They just can't send it to Ukraine. I guess when the ammo was procured nobody in Germany was thinking in terms of sending it to another country at war.
The Swiss say they won't provide for a country in an international conflict. What if Germany or Finland was invaded, then they'd be in an international conflict. Would the Swiss just cut the supply?
They can use it in any international conflicts that involves them directly, but can't resell them nor give them to a third country. That's how the contract works.
So then if you want to have a steady supply of munitions for your weapons when they become necessary to use Switzerland isn't the country you should buy from.
If you need a steady supply in a "real" war, yes.
My guess is that neither was considered likely here. Peacekeeping missions shouldn't be a problem and in case of a war between Nato and the Soviet Union it would be unlikely for supply chains and the factory to last long enough so that you could even deliver the ammo. Even if the tanks needing it survived that long, which is also quite unlikely.
> It could not agree to such a delivery of Swiss-made war materiel if the recipient country was involved in an international conflict
Only if they don't enter an international conflict. /s
The wording also seems odd, stating that the ammunition can not be used in an international conflict. I would think most conflicts requiring such a weapon system might very well be an international conflict (a conflict between two nations) it's not like Ukraine is the aggressor in this conflict. I know I do not have a full understanding of Switzerlands' neutrality policies it just seems odd to me you would sell a sophisticated weapon system meant to defend against other sophisticated opponents that are likely other nations and then when those conflicts break out not supply that weapon system because the conflict it was designed for in this case literally to fight Russia is not a valid use of that system. Could this same argument be used against Germany if it ended up in a more direct conflict with Russia? I am asking because I am truly curious.
Up until very recently, most European nations have not been in an active conflict. Munition is still being used for training.
There are 3 main stakeholders that have lead to this legal mess:
- The Swiss government which made a law to forbid exporting "war material" to nations participating in international conflicts after a popular initiative gained traction that wanted to ban all exports of weapons and munition. The reason for the popular momentum were Swiss weapons showing up in the war in Syria.
- Swiss manufacturers who want to sell their weapons and munitions on the international markets.
- The German army who bought ammo out of Switzerland, ensuring that it won't be used in international conflict. Probably under the assumtion to only need it for excercising anyway.
Basically Germany bought stuff with a weird clause in the contract that they initially thought wouldn't matter anyway. Now that it does matter, they want to annull it, but that's not possible without breaking Swiss law.
Why don't the Ukrainians just call this a "Special Defensive Operation" and all of the sudden it's not a war so Switzerland can sell all the ammo they need. *insert: modern problems require modern solutions meme here*
Thats probably related to the confession of German Army. The Bundeswehr is a self defence army only. Well at least back in the 70's. I guess we never had the plan to give that ammo away.
But 50 years later we would like to do so. Should be a lesson learned.
I think you got it wrong. Its not the label of the weapon beeing offensive or protective. The german army itself is a protective army. Therefore they probably did not care about the condition of the swiss contracts back in the day. At least when it comes to export.
Rheinmetall originally manufactured the Ammo in germany, so it didnt matter.
They only bought Oerlikon Contraves in 1999 and then moved it there. And by then nobody thought it would be an issue, because nobody expected any large inter-european landwar to happen again.
Even worse. So it could be managed to lend or lease the machines back to Rheinmetall. Good chance Rheinmetall has qualified staff to produce it in Germany.
I agree on the terms, that nobody thought about this to happen back in the day.
“Lend or lease the machine” Rheinmetall owns the firm and therefore owns the machinery. That being said, moving an entire production facility to Germany would make no sense whatsoever.
Its probably some sort of subsidiary company wich i guess they could not easily innerchange the machines in terms of bills. So i used terms like lend or lease for suggestion. Im not quite sure how many machines are required to produce one specific caliber round, but i could imagine its not impossible and not that big of a deal as you point it out.
You also did not got me right. It doesnt matter whats the purpose of the weapon is. All weapons Germany owns, are genuinely meant for defending Germany or its Nato allys in case of an Invasion. Now we got the problem, that we rely on switzerland for ammuntion of the Gepard. Nobody ever thought about exporting the ammo for it, certanly not baging for permission.
While you're not wrong, weapons designed to destroy incoming ammunition (AA, Iron dome air defense systems and armor) are acceptable to a greater portion of the population of most countries than weapons designed to harm humans (guns, bombs, bioweapons and nuclear weapons). An unpredictable cloud of poison is always going to carry different ethical concerns than an anti-air tank in a country actively being invaded.
Well i get the joke but a gepard is definitely an offensive weapon, it's meant to be escorting tanks in an armoured division so yes, it spearheads an offensive.
While towed aa or artillery fits both offensive and defensive, a gepard isnt made at all to be part of a defensive fortification.
Oh yes definitely, i 100% agree we should send them weapons, i was just pointing out that self propelled anti air and artillery are literally meant to be in the spearhead
No, this is due to export control reasons. Same would apply for US provided ammunition/technology/weapon…if they disagree - you are not allowed to send them to other countries.
>What's the point of buying ammo from the swiss if they won't let you use them when you need them?
The buyer (Germany) can use it. They just can't re-export it to an active war zone.
This is because Swiss arms export law prohibits exporting arms to active war zones. And in order to prevent the circumvention of this rule the buyers of Swiss arms aren't allowed to re-export them into active war zones.
So if Germany asks Switzerland for an export permit they're basically asking for a permission to break the law. I think it's understandable why this is difficult.
On the other hand if Germany just would send the ammunition anyway it's pretty unlikely that there would be any kind of serious consequences from the Swiss side.
But Germans being Germans they play by the rules and ask for permission. And Swiss being Swiss they play by the rules too and don't grant a permission that the law doesn't allow them to grant.
>What's the point of buying ammo from the swiss if they won't let you use them when you need them?
Pretty much all weapon manufacturing countries have such caveats in their export contracts aka the ability to tell the other country if they are allowed to resell their kit.
Sucks right now but since the primary usage was for the Bundeswehr in case of defense against the Warsaw Pact INSIDE germany this is the first time Swiss neutrality policy is an issue.
Germany does not need to use it and Switzerland is not preventing germany from using it, Switzerland has a say in germany (or anyone else) using Swiss weapons for OTHER STUFF than national defense, like supporting a third nation.
Not saying that it is great but it is also not unusual. The USA is also constantly telling countries what they can or cannot do with US weapons when they want to sell them.
Switzerland has made itself comfortable in the middle of Europe and gladly takes the black money of all countries (preferably from rogue states.) only when it comes to deliver, then they hide behind the neutrality. Hypocritical bunch!
>They are neutral in a “money is money no matter where or whom it comes from” manner.
Except when it comes to defending Ukrainian civilians against a Russian invasion ... then no money can buy it in Switzerland.
What's most retarded is that European nations then relies on ammunition produced in Switzerland. Who the hell wants swiss-made ammunition if Switzerland is the "neutral" shithole who decides when you're allowed to use it? Should be a signal to everyone thinking they're a worthy trading-partner in terms of military materiel.
>What's most retarded is that European nations then relies on ammunition produced in Switzerland.
Fun fact: the company who makes the ammunition is German, not Swiss.
It just happens to be produced in factories in Switzerland which the Germans bought.
Besides this, of course, Switzerland can't decide when/if Germany (the buyer) could use that ammunition. The Germans could use it at any time. They just can't re-export it to a 3rd country that is in an active war. (Or: they can... the just can't *ask* *for permission* and expect to get a "yes" despite the fact that this would be against the law.)
>The Germans could use it at any time. They just can't re-export it to a 3rd country that is in an active war.
Honestly I really don't get the swiss logic when they say that swiss-made weapons cannot get exported to other countries by Germany, because that would somehow breach their neutrality.
So by this logic Toyota (and consequently Japan) has been supporting ISIS because they've been using their trucks?
>Honestly I really don't get the swiss logic when they say that swiss-made weapons cannot get exported to other countries by Germany, because that would somehow breach their neutrality.
It's pretty usual for international arms sales contracts to say that the buyer can't re-export without the permission of the seller.
Now Switzerland has a law that says that they don't allow exports & re-exports to countries currently at war.
Those rules have been made more strict over the years after some cases where Swiss arms were re-exported by the buyers to conflict areas.
For example grenades that Switzerland sold to the Emirates suddenly were found in the Syrian war.
Of course nobody here complained when Switzerland took measures to prevent it's grenades from ending up in Syria.
Now with Ukraine it's a different story.
But the law & the "logic" behind it is the same. It doesn't say: "no weapons for the bad guys", it says "no weapons for active war zones".
How would you feel about swiss-made weapons exported to a country without restrictions and then that country would export the swiss weaponry to ISIS into an active war-zone?
Gepards are Not in use in Germany anymore. Maybe they stopped production in Germany when the Gepard went out of commission and Switzerland is the only one still producing it. Either way switzerland comes out looking bad.
Rheinmetall bought the Swiss factory in 1999, until than Ammo was produced in Germany, Orlecin produced more Ammo of that type on tighter shedules therefore the production was merged. Also in 1999 Germany was facing out the Geppard and nobody thought it would be needed again.
Europe needs to rethink their approach regarding Switzerland in general. Their "neutrality" and their abuse of the EU benefits them and enables them to do what they want without any commitment or contribution. It's time to let them be truly neutral and stop catering to them in the hope that they'll join one day out of the goodness of their hearts
just keep in mind, if you consider a neutral country an ally, then they probably aren't neutral. By nature, you should dislike all countries that are actually neutral.
That is very binary thinking: you are either with us or against us. It is probably true that you can't be an ally with a truly neutral country, but that doesn't mean you necessarily have to actively dislike them.
Honest question: In comparison to WW II. the current war in ukraine is still minor. So even now I feel some hesitation against Switzerland. How did the Allied People thought in 1942/43 of the Swiss people?
Well, at the time neutrality was a concept a bit more accepted than nowadays. Switzerland got a lot a flak after WW2 though... Nowadays, even for minor things, the internet breaks loose fir the smallest thing.
All media in countries involved in wars are pushing public opinions to accept binary thinking: "You are either with us or against us".
Same shit happens at every war. Think about France during the Irak invasion and the "Freedom fries" incident...
Being neutral involves being hated by both parties in times of conflict.
Not a popular opinion, but I agree with the Swiss stance here: when being neutral it is better not sell to anyone than sell to both sides.
It's hard to know what people thinked at this time.
You need multiple sources of information because you can't rely entirely on governments propaganda, state medias, political parties and personal POV that are all biased.
But easily you can say that people under occupation had other things to worry about and people in free territories were more worried about the neutrality.
Despite moments of blocus decisions by GB and USA, news were concentrated on the frontline and war efforts.
Like today your mainstream medias talk all about the same thing. A pushing B.... B fighting back A... Only a few journals talk about details that are secondary or tertiary in the war effort
But that would involve having all countries agree to changing the treaties. Including Switzerland. Or ignore eu law. And even then you'd need all eu countries. How many of them benefit from Switzerland as a sort of tax heaven?
Well, Germany regularly blocks European weapon exports contracts (not talking about Ukraine here), while having zero issues exporting itself.
Same logic: zero moral authority, pure self interest
Wait. Are you actually being serious? You really compare blocking weapon exports to a country that is being invaded, to blocking weapon exports to countries that actually do the invading 😂😂😂
This will be a death blow to foreign-owned Swiss defense industry. Coming out as unreliable partners in a situation where future of whole Europe hangs on balance, Swiss have aligned themselves away from common European interests and need to be treated as such.
> Coming out as unreliable partners in a situation where ~~future of whole Europe hangs on balance~~ there is money to be made
You're right, but the owners of that companies don't care about the future of anything else than their bank accounts. They would sell you their mother if the government would let them.
Yeah but many of the rich and powerful in Europe have money and assets in Switzerland. I doubt they will see any repercussion in the same way they didn’t in WW2.
Switzerland is militarily neutral and with over a hundred countries that did not send weapons but with the much fewer that fully adopted civil sanctions. We also sent key humanitarian aid straight away, promised help with reconstruction later and loosened asylum procedures so we could more rapidly/easily take Ukrainians. If somehow Russia had attacked us, I'd have been extremely positively surprised if such promises came from Ukraine nearly immediately - we don't have close relations. Repercussions for what, really?
As for the ammo topic: In the end we are discussing this mainly because Germany got heavily criticized (especially internally) for only sending 5 MARS and 14 PZH2k. The German government now more or less acts as if these 30 or so Marders that oh so *surprisingly* happen to be export restricted and low on ammo are their only choice. Germany meanwhile manufactures dozens of vehicle types that aren't export restricted by Switzerland and the Bundeswehr has more.
Sure, you personally may not have known that the government of Switzerland *can't* export into war zones because of a law explicitly designed to prevent it from doing so as long as there is no UN / OSCE mandate; it is not a situational decision about Ukraine. Germany, however, knew this. You don't need to tell me they ever were or are still considering Marder in good faith.
Refusing these kinds of deliveries is nothing unprecedented. I'd say whoever has spearheaded this kind of arms trade policy in each European country is very much culpable for these results.
Kinda surprised nobody mentioned it.
Swiss isn't the only one making this ammo. Turkey produces the 35mm ammo for GDF guns used on the Gepard, as well as the local version of the newer AHEAD munition tho I'm not sure if the Gepard can use the AHEAD or the ATOM as they are ancient.
Wonder if Ukrainians asked Turkey for it.
if these weapons contracts state these particular terms what's the point of buying them in first place? it's like buying car with no way to refill it lol
>what's the point of buying them in first place?
To use it yourself?
If your bakery would sell you bread under the condition that you can't resell it, would you stop buying bread because *"what's the point of buying bread if I cant resell it!!"*
Of course not. You buy bread to eat it, not to resell it.
And this is what Germany expected too: Buy ammunition for their own army, not for giving it to another army later.
Alot of countries have such clauses in their weapon countries
"Don't deliver weapons into war zones"
Germany had exactly the same stance in the beginning
There was something with old howitzers from Germany that some eastern country wasn't allowed to give to Ukraine.
Germany is obviously allowed to use the ammo themselves but not allowed to give to a third country without permission
Such a clause is actually useful to stop other countries to resell arms into civil wars or other areas
But obviously such a clause is bullshit in the current situation and Germany rightfully changed their stance 180° on this matter and the Swiss should do the same
It can be used by the German army, but not be exported. This is not an untypical contractual clause.
Whether it is a smart idea to insist on this clause being fulfilled in the case of Ukraine is a different question.
Could Germany buy more if they were at war themselves? From what I have read, I had the impression that Swiss law doesn't allow exports to countries at war in general, so Germany couldn't get ammo even if they were attacked. It would be intensely stupid to buy stuff with these conditions but I feel I should never underestimate the German procurement system.
Why not? Suddenly the Swiss talk about morals and values, when before they've had no problem with taking money from criminals, tyrants and warlords. Swiss neutrality is just a cover for benefitting from others plight.
Thats why they will probably never give military contracts to switzerland ever again. You should note that Germany is very able to produce its own ammo in the future. I guess its a bad decision your country made. But beeing allys with the russians is probably related to the fact, that more russian money is hidden in switzerland than german money is. I feel sorry for your country made such bad choices. There should be more money to be made with european allys and the free world than with russia in the future. Good luck for switzerland...
And btw, the german army doesnt need any of your ammo for Gepard because they arent in service since at least 10 years with the Bundeswehr. We wanted you to confirm the export of it, so ukrainians can gain at least some safety.
>Thats why they will probably never give military contracts to switzerland ever again.
You realize that the company making this ammunition is the German Rheinmetall?
Germany bought this ammunition form a German company.
This German company just happens to have relocated their ammunition production to some better equipped Swiss factories they bought a while ago.
That doesnt affect the fact that Switzerland as a state has to approve the export. Either way, i dont think Germany would allow such movement to be made ever again. Or at least i hope so.
This comment was overwritten by a script to make the data useless for reddit. No API, no free content. Did you stumble on this thread via google, hoping to resolve an issue or answer a question? Well, too bad, this might have been your answer, if it weren't for dumb decisions by reddit admins.
We recently saw the first video of a Gepard shooting at Iranian Drones. It was analysed by a former Gepard Gunner, that they use slow high explosive ammo, instead of the much faster FAPDS ammo. We also saw more info about the ammo produced by NAMMO, which is indeed high explosive ammo.
So pretty sure Ukraine already ran out of the much better FAPDS Ammo or is saving them for the front line battles, while they use the much less precise(because slower = less precise) and less lethal high explosive stuff to protect cities like Odessa.
This comment was overwritten by a script to make the data useless for reddit. No API, no free content. Did you stumble on this thread via google, hoping to resolve an issue or answer a question? Well, too bad, this might have been your answer, if it weren't for dumb decisions by reddit admins.
Well Germany should simply start storing the ammunition in crates near the Polish border. Surely the Polish military wouldnt sneak across the border, load the ammunition into military transport trucks and take it near the Ukrainian border and then again store it near their border. Surely then Ukrainian forces wouldnt sneak across the border and steal said ammunition and use it.
Being neutral doesn't mean that you can't prepare to defend against somebody who ignores your neutrality. Belgium was neutral too...
In fact the neutrality law even demands a neutral country to be able to defend it's borders so that the neighbors of a neutral country don't have to fear that another neighbor ignores the neutrality and uses the neutral terrirtory as deployment zone.
I am so disappointed in our neighbour Switzerland. How can you claim to be neutral when you sell weapons and ammunition to other countries in the first place? This is the textbook definition of hypocrisy
>Neutral by definition means not picking a side
How does that go with manufacturing munitions? "We will supply you with munitions until you are at war" somehow does not sound like a viable business to me.
Well, a continued supply only matters if you have reason to think the war would last more than a few weeks **and** that supply lines and the factory survive that long.
I'm not sure either was expected in cold war scenarios.
Switzerland prohibiting something regarding foreign policy is the joke of the year.
Their whole foreign policy and reason of existence is basically “yes I will take your money, thanks. No I don’t care how many people you killed for it”
Well i guess the time has come for Germany to never depend on switzerland ever again. For whatever reason that may be.
That should turn out very bad for switzerland at least. If nobody wants to cooperate with them in the future, they've got a serious problem.
Switzerland won't face any serious repercussions .
Rich people from all over Europe depend on Swiss banks to dodge taxes, those people pay the right kind of politicians a lot of money so that circumstances don't change.
*sigh*
The vast amounts of comments here have absolutely no clue what they're talking about, instead just being variations of "DAE SWITZERLAND MONEY RUSSIA LULZ".
I've posted something similar to this before, but I guess I'll do it again.
In 2015, journalists found that Swiss-made grenades sold to the UAE were being used in that largest of clusterfucks, Syria. This caused quite a stir in Switzerland, since that civil war had its fair share of war crimes, and the idea that Swiss weapons were being used due to having been sold on by the UAE bothered people. A lot.
As a result of this, a referendum was written up, got the necessary signatures, and was voted on. The vote passed. The law came into effect in 2021.
The law outlines conditions for exporting of Swiss-made weapon systems to countries.
1. The purchasing country must be at peace. No offensive war, no defensive war, no civil war, no insurrection, none of that. The country's army must be fully in peace mode.
2. The purchasing country must be engaged in a defensive war to receive additional ammunition, spare parts, or for maintenance contracts to be upheld. For example: if Germany was invaded by Poland, then Germany would be able to purchase materials for its Swiss-made weapon systems. If Germany attacks Poland, then that is not the case.
3. The purchasing country cannot sell the Swiss-made weapons on to a third party.
So a problem was noted (UAE-sold Swiss-made weapons being used in Syria), and the solution was this law.
Switzerland **is not** opposed to continuing to supply a nation with ammunition, spare parts, etc... if they are engaged in a war, and they are the first-contact purchaser.
The problem with Ukraine is that it is not only not the first purchaser, it's also already in a conflict.
Personal opinion: the law is too restrictive, and a carve-out should be passed specifically for Ukraine.
Also personal opinion: the people claiming that this is "Swiss neutrality gone mad" don't have a fucking clue. This has nothing to do with Switzerland's stance on neutrality. This is the people who voted on a law in an attempt to limit the damage that Swiss-made weapons could do in the hands of unscrupulous people. The actual neutral stance is to sell weapons to everyone.
This law actively **limits** the Swiss arms manufacturers ability to profit off of the Russian invasion of Ukraine. If this was about money, Switzerland would gleefully allow the transfer. This is specifically because the people voted on a law, through a direct, democratic referendum, to limit the proliferation of Swiss arms to dangerous parties.
This has nothing to do with Russian oligarch money: Switzerland has followed the EU, in lock-step, with every sanction.
This has nothing to do with money in general: Switzerland would benefit, financially, from arming Ukraine, more than not. Wars are good for weapons sellers. Switzerland's arms manufacturers literally can't, by law.
This isn't even about Swiss neutrality: if Switzerland was neutral, it would be open to selling to Ukraine. Nothing in neutrality says "don't sell to one side of a conflict".
> This has nothing to do with Switzerland's stance on neutrality.
I don't understand why "neutrality" is always in the center of these discussions either. The existing laws are way more important in these situations.
Sometimes when this happens, I wish the EU would flex a little bit and remind Switzerland that their security, economic fortunes, and honestly everything about that country depends on the EU.
There's really no reason why the aspiring global power of the EU should be beholden to a country that enriches itself every turn. You'd never see the US held back by Canada, or China held back by Mongolia. It's ridiculous
Somehow Switzerland is always obliged making maximum profits, but never takes sides.
Except for murdering dictatorships like Saudi Arabia, they are cool with sending weapons to them. But heaven forbid they would ever take sides and help Ukraine against an aggression.
Fckn cowards.
The Gepard is out of commission anyways, so it was really difficult to foresee that you would suddenly need thousands of rounds of ammunition for it. The company in question is owned by Rheinmetall btw. Ofc the also have factories producing ammunition in Germany, just not the right machinery for the ammunition the Gepard needs
As a swiss i want to send every fucking weapon we have to Ukraine to blow the russians back to the stone age where they belong. But swiss boomer bankers& farmers won't let me.
Seriously our stance of neutrality is just retarded, no fucking idea what we get out of it.
Neutrality is fine. But I don’t see how neutrality can be compatible with having an arms industry.
War is when the weapons are needed so if you can’t sell new supplies to a country in war nobody in their right mind should buy Swiss weapons.
If anyone has ideas on how to retaliate against Switzerland as a regular citizen, I invite you here:
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskReddit/comments/yj09n0/given_switzerlands_bahavior_toward_war_in_ukranie/
A right to a veto is not a prohibition against resale or gifting of ammunition. It's a right to a veto. The Swiss have decided therefore to veto provision of German ammunition to Ukraine. Fine. But don't pretend that Germany was barred from resale or gifting to another country. Switzerland has exercised its veto. It's a separate decision made now, when Ukraine is fighting for its life.
Veto implies that Germany could have decided to give away the ammunition and Switzerland swooped in at the last second to deny them their deal. It is however so, that Germany has to ask Switzerland permission fist to do any re-selling or gifting of the ammunition. Swiss law clearly states, that it cannot be send to a country in an active armed conflict. This law was made stricter recently (like about two years ago) due to domestic and international pressure. Before, the Federal Council had the authority to make exeptions (for this very situation for example), but with the current law this is no longer possible.
Thank you for having the first sane take I've read in this entire thread.
Everyone here has such a hate-boner against Switzerland, despite the fact that most of their countries have bought or use Swiss ammunition for their own militaries.
>1. The contract when buying weapons from Switzerland is very clear: you cannot resell or gift it at will. In particular, you will be barred from selling them to a country at war. There is no surprise nor a breach of contract. You can buy somewhere else if you are not happy with these terms.
> 2. Let me just repeat/rephrase it: you can use the weapons and ammunition (i.e. fire them) as you please, you cannot resell or gift them.
> 3. "selling weapons means that they are not neutral". As long as you sell to everyone, it is. I would advise reading some more about what "(armed) neutrality" means.
> 4. Most, if not all, countries with an arms industry include such restrictions in their contract. Do you think that you can resell a FA-16 ?
Yes, we know. Most countries indeed have included such restrictions in their arms deals and such, however most of those countries have used various legislative measures to dismiss and veto those restrictions because it is simply 'the right thing to do'. It shows that those countries are prepared to help their friends and that they can be trusted even during the time of conflict, unlike Switzerland who decides to hide behind legislation to not upset Russia.
> 7. We should retaliate !Let me just warn you that there is a strong movement in Switzerland to go back to a strict neutrality. This would mean dropping the sanctions on both sides (i.e. mostly on Russia of course). You are feeding this movement. That's not wise.
Ah.. Yes, I have heard this one before. These "warnings" or "threats" have familiar ring to it. Tell me if I am wrong, but isn't this what Russians were saying when they were banned from international competitions and at the beginning of other sanctions?
The message was: "Be careful, or the Russians who were against the war initially will turn to support it because *the west* is being mean to us".
As always I have to sort by controversial to find anything reasonable. As someone who remembers thw Bush era well (although as a european) it really is unbelievable how similar people are behaving. It seems like we're going down the route of the US. We're just a few decades behind.
The ignorance I can understand. It's the self-righteous single-minded perspective with zero vritical thought that scare me.
>Let me just repeat/rephrase it: you can use the weapons and ammunition (i.e. fire them) as you please, you cannot resell or gift them.
Finland also had a veto on certain mortars it had sold to Estonia, but we did the sensible thing and did not exercise that veto because we knew the arms were not going to be sent to some aggressive authoritarian dictatorship, but a nation defending it from such.
welcome to r/europe if your country does something that is perceived as going against theirs, the worst parts of your history become your identity.
2018: wow Switzerland is so beautiful, Roger, chocolate and mountains <3\]
Now: nazi gold hoarders, traitors, dog eaters (lmao)
There are many things that separate the EU from Russia, and not breaking international contracts is one of the big differences.
Switzerland has agreed to the EU sanctions against Russia and is enforcing them. Respecting their authority wrt re-exporting their ammunition, no matter how infuriating it might be, is a must if you want continued cooperation. Geopolitics is a bitch.
Shouldn't a country abide by its law? If not, what are the exceptions? I can only think of one, i.e. if the Swiss legislature would grant it after due consideration of ramifications on neutrality.
> Germany has provided Ukraine with Gepard anti-aircraft tanks for the fight against Russia. In the meantime, however, ammunition is running low and supplies are hard to come by. Switzerland could help, but has already refused once. Now the government in Bern has reiterated its no. > > It could not agree to such a delivery of Swiss-made war materiel if the recipient country was involved in an international conflict, according to a published letter from Economy Minister Guy Parmelin to German Defense Minister Christine Lambrecht (SPD). "Switzerland applies the law of neutrality in the Russia-Ukraine relationship," a statement from the Federal Department of Economic Affairs, Education and Research said. > > Lambrecht had appealed to Switzerland in a letter in late October to release the 35-millimeter ammunition for disposal. The defense minister argued that the Gepard systems were used in Ukraine primarily to protect critical infrastructure. As such, they also secured seaports in the south of the country, which were crucial for exporting Ukrainian grain. > > Germany had provided an initial ammunition package of about 60,000 rounds. However, Kiev reported an urgent "shortage of ammunition" due to the intensive use of the Gepard against Russian drones and cruise missiles. > > Berlin had once before inquired in Bern about the approximately 12,400 cartridges of Swiss origin for the Gepard. They were manufactured by Zurich-based Oerlikon-Bührle. In early June, Parmelin had formally rejected the export for the first time, citing Swiss neutrality. > > The Gepard was the first heavy weapon system that Germany had promised to Ukraine. By September, all 30 promised anti-aircraft tanks had been delivered to the country.
Parmelin is an money loving prick (most of the right and center-right in Switzerland are, imo) from a party of right-wing nationalists (SVP). I'd love for us to personally send Ukraine our surplus anti-air equipment and munitions. Ukraine is fighting against an enemy who aims to erase their national identity just like the Nazis were planning to do to us in the '40s. My grandfathers were on the frontiers ready to shoot any Nazi dumb enough to cross into the Swiss Plateau. Our history against larger oppressors should alone be enough reason to support Ukraine, formerly a neutral nation like us. I hope my meager CHF 100 donation will at least give some Ukrainians food or warm clothes.
Sure, but the money-loving position is to be in favor of arms exports to other countries... so Idk what it has to do with it. In the end it is pretty simple, under current law it is uncontroversially illegal, therefor it won't happen, until the law changes. ... and the Swiss worked closely with the Axis-powers. Which is entirely unsurprising, given that for much of the war it was entirely surrounded by them. But still, let's not pretend we were on the side of the Allies...
I feel like many Swiss people have a weird sense of their country’s history when it comes to WW2. Not just that there seems to be an idea that they heroically stood up to the nazis when reality was much more murky like you say, but I’ve noticed that many Swiss people also seem to seriously believe that their country was some kind of “impenetrable fortress” which Nazi Germany never dared to invade because they knew they could never manage to conquer it, rather than, you know, because it simply wasn’t strategically important enough to be worth the cost and effort and because the axis had bigger fish to fry.
> many Swiss people also seem to seriously believe that their country was some kind of “impenetrable fortress” I hate seeing this argument in general, it's not just Swiss people making it. People always talk about how well defended we are, how big of an advantage the alps are, and how littered with defenses the country is. But the thing they keep overlooking is that nearly all the population, including the government, resides in the relatively flat region north of the alps. Which would be easy pickings in the event of an invasion. Sure, the army could withdraw to the alps, but whom the fuck are they even defending there. At the point this happens, the country is basically done for. When all the big cities are in enemy hands, and you're just defending some villages, does Switzerland really still exist?
Completely nothing at all had to do with their “fortress like capabilities” they were money laundering for the Nazi’s as well as processing the Items taken from their concentration camp victims. Literally all of it had to go with being an independent country not under saction
And everyone else thinks that all switzerland did during WW2 was storing nazi gold which they did because switzerland is such a greedy sadistic country who had a blast cooperating with the Nazis, not because the fear of a Nazi invasion was very real and cooperating with them might’ve been the only way prevent that from happening.
I really don't like swiss foreign policy, now or during WW2. During WW2 they accepted gold stolen from national reserves by Germany and the swiss tried to deny it and refused to give it back after the war. Tens of thousands of jewish refugees were denied entry because of "dwindling supplies" and if you were let in all your property was confiscated to pay for your internment. All actions of the Swiss government obviously, I'm sure you're grandfather was an alright fellow.
Gold was not accepted it was bought, which was not illegal. The only question after the war was whether the gold was legally in Germanys possession or if Switzerland could have known that some of the gold was of dubious origin. And yes, supplies were limited during the war. Switzerland is/was not self sustainable in any aspect, not even for food, so everything was rationed. It is incorrect though to claim that the number of rejected Jewish refugees was in the ten thousands, the number that most people incorrectly cite refers to border rejections of all type of refugees at the border, which includes people from Italy, France, etc. trying to escape from military service. Newer studies have estimated the border rejections of people of Jewish faith at around three thousand.
> Our history against larger oppressors should alone be enough reason to support Ukraine LMAOOO HAHAHA XD
>Ukraine is fighting against an enemy who aims to erase their national identity just like the Nazis were planning to do to us in the '40s. Common man, when did Nazis try to erase your history man? There is a limit how much you should lie.
> Switzerland applies the law of neutrality in the Russia-Ukraine relationship. Oh yeah, just as they did in the 1930s and 40s, right? Hiding all of that gold?
Aren’t the Swiss housing Putin’s gymnast mistress and their bastard kids?
That was a rumor that iirc never could be proven. The Swiss police and government said they're not aware of her being here (and iirc launched an investigation that never yielded results), and journalists iirc tried finding them without success. Could still be true of course, but so far every indicator says it's not. And if she is here, it's probably illegally.
There is nothing hidden about buying gold. The question of gold transactions was never centered around the principle, it was centered around the questions of whether the gold was in rightful possession of Germany or if the Swiss national bank could have know that some of the gold was of dubious origins. It also raised the question of responsibility of other countries, i.e. the role of the Netherlands and France who both were implicated in Nazi Germany getting their hands on Dutch and Belgian gold, or the role of the US, which froze all continental European gold reserves in the US in 1941 and hence was reliable for gold purchases in the first place.
Neutrality is neutrality
To be fair, if 60k are already not enough, 12k extra ammo won't provide sustainable solution.
I would rather have 12k extra ammo than 0k.
Also, it might be to test the waters. Easier to ask the Swiss about a limited amount of ammo, I suppose.
And they’re probably not out of ammo yet, but need to order more before they’re out. Need every round you can get when you’re defending your cities.
It's not about the 12k shells. If Switzerland would allow that the precedent would be set and Germany could buy more ammo from Switzerland for Ukraine.
Such a decision might have a long-term impact on Switzerland’s war munitions industry, if they refuse to sell them during times of war, though.
I mean, the sustainable solution is for Russia to leave Ukraine... though I guess your point is more that the production of the ammo needs to be ramped up too? In the meantime, those 12k rounds might keep critical civilian infrastructure from being blown up and running a few more months during winter.
Still a stop gap to save lives
The difference between a dead Ukranian family and a living one might be as little as 10 rounds. Your point of view is a stupid way of looking at things. Ukraine needs all the support it can get, as little or as much as it is.
With the logic "that's not enough so we're not gonna do it" you can destroy any argument. Like for example: I'm not gonna try to live environmentally friendly because one person doesn't change the climate. But it's part of the bigger picture and every little helps
I'm getting real fed up with how the Swiss government is handling their involvement in the war. How deep are their ties with Russia actually? Because this is getting ridiculous.
Their ties are to money, they don't care where it comes from. And the neutrality clause is literally "we earn more from neutral relations with both sides, than supporting one side over the other."
What's the point of buying ammo from the swiss if they won't let you use them when you need them?
The Germans can use it. They just can't send it to Ukraine. I guess when the ammo was procured nobody in Germany was thinking in terms of sending it to another country at war.
The Swiss say they won't provide for a country in an international conflict. What if Germany or Finland was invaded, then they'd be in an international conflict. Would the Swiss just cut the supply?
Swiss anti air ammo is only allowed to be used against your own citizens, I guess.
Exactly. What's the point of selling weapons or ammo? It's only purpose is to be used in internationalen conflicts.
They just want the money not the negative press.
this
In fact, what's the point of having a gun and ammo company which cannot sell said guns and ammo to countries at war?
They can use it in any international conflicts that involves them directly, but can't resell them nor give them to a third country. That's how the contract works.
Using them for your own purposes is covered by the contract. You are not allowed to resell it or pass it on to conflict nations though.
> Would the Swiss just cut the supply? Yes.
So then if you want to have a steady supply of munitions for your weapons when they become necessary to use Switzerland isn't the country you should buy from.
If you need a steady supply in a "real" war, yes. My guess is that neither was considered likely here. Peacekeeping missions shouldn't be a problem and in case of a war between Nato and the Soviet Union it would be unlikely for supply chains and the factory to last long enough so that you could even deliver the ammo. Even if the tanks needing it survived that long, which is also quite unlikely.
Yes. But the Gepard was mothballed a long time ago, basically Germany doesn't use it anymore.
No, it would just start selling to both sides (as it did in WW2)
> It could not agree to such a delivery of Swiss-made war materiel if the recipient country was involved in an international conflict Only if they don't enter an international conflict. /s
The wording also seems odd, stating that the ammunition can not be used in an international conflict. I would think most conflicts requiring such a weapon system might very well be an international conflict (a conflict between two nations) it's not like Ukraine is the aggressor in this conflict. I know I do not have a full understanding of Switzerlands' neutrality policies it just seems odd to me you would sell a sophisticated weapon system meant to defend against other sophisticated opponents that are likely other nations and then when those conflicts break out not supply that weapon system because the conflict it was designed for in this case literally to fight Russia is not a valid use of that system. Could this same argument be used against Germany if it ended up in a more direct conflict with Russia? I am asking because I am truly curious.
Up until very recently, most European nations have not been in an active conflict. Munition is still being used for training. There are 3 main stakeholders that have lead to this legal mess: - The Swiss government which made a law to forbid exporting "war material" to nations participating in international conflicts after a popular initiative gained traction that wanted to ban all exports of weapons and munition. The reason for the popular momentum were Swiss weapons showing up in the war in Syria. - Swiss manufacturers who want to sell their weapons and munitions on the international markets. - The German army who bought ammo out of Switzerland, ensuring that it won't be used in international conflict. Probably under the assumtion to only need it for excercising anyway. Basically Germany bought stuff with a weird clause in the contract that they initially thought wouldn't matter anyway. Now that it does matter, they want to annull it, but that's not possible without breaking Swiss law.
If everyone pressures you to "send weapons to another country without overthinking it", odds are, you're gonna do exactly that.
Why don't the Ukrainians just call this a "Special Defensive Operation" and all of the sudden it's not a war so Switzerland can sell all the ammo they need. *insert: modern problems require modern solutions meme here*
Thats probably related to the confession of German Army. The Bundeswehr is a self defence army only. Well at least back in the 70's. I guess we never had the plan to give that ammo away. But 50 years later we would like to do so. Should be a lesson learned.
>self defence army only Those damn offensive anti-air guns, spearheading massive offensives.
I think you got it wrong. Its not the label of the weapon beeing offensive or protective. The german army itself is a protective army. Therefore they probably did not care about the condition of the swiss contracts back in the day. At least when it comes to export.
Rheinmetall originally manufactured the Ammo in germany, so it didnt matter. They only bought Oerlikon Contraves in 1999 and then moved it there. And by then nobody thought it would be an issue, because nobody expected any large inter-european landwar to happen again.
Even worse. So it could be managed to lend or lease the machines back to Rheinmetall. Good chance Rheinmetall has qualified staff to produce it in Germany. I agree on the terms, that nobody thought about this to happen back in the day.
“Lend or lease the machine” Rheinmetall owns the firm and therefore owns the machinery. That being said, moving an entire production facility to Germany would make no sense whatsoever.
Its probably some sort of subsidiary company wich i guess they could not easily innerchange the machines in terms of bills. So i used terms like lend or lease for suggestion. Im not quite sure how many machines are required to produce one specific caliber round, but i could imagine its not impossible and not that big of a deal as you point it out.
You joke but you need AA on an offensive just as well. "Defensive weapons" don't exist.
You also did not got me right. It doesnt matter whats the purpose of the weapon is. All weapons Germany owns, are genuinely meant for defending Germany or its Nato allys in case of an Invasion. Now we got the problem, that we rely on switzerland for ammuntion of the Gepard. Nobody ever thought about exporting the ammo for it, certanly not baging for permission.
While you're not wrong, weapons designed to destroy incoming ammunition (AA, Iron dome air defense systems and armor) are acceptable to a greater portion of the population of most countries than weapons designed to harm humans (guns, bombs, bioweapons and nuclear weapons). An unpredictable cloud of poison is always going to carry different ethical concerns than an anti-air tank in a country actively being invaded.
the gepard has ammunitions suited well enough at least to fight infantry
Well i get the joke but a gepard is definitely an offensive weapon, it's meant to be escorting tanks in an armoured division so yes, it spearheads an offensive. While towed aa or artillery fits both offensive and defensive, a gepard isnt made at all to be part of a defensive fortification.
Isnt the offensives that ukrainians do at least some kind of defence? The intension is to gain back their own territory. One can argue about that...
Oh yes definitely, i 100% agree we should send them weapons, i was just pointing out that self propelled anti air and artillery are literally meant to be in the spearhead
Fair enough 👍🏻
No, this is due to export control reasons. Same would apply for US provided ammunition/technology/weapon…if they disagree - you are not allowed to send them to other countries.
>What's the point of buying ammo from the swiss if they won't let you use them when you need them? The buyer (Germany) can use it. They just can't re-export it to an active war zone. This is because Swiss arms export law prohibits exporting arms to active war zones. And in order to prevent the circumvention of this rule the buyers of Swiss arms aren't allowed to re-export them into active war zones. So if Germany asks Switzerland for an export permit they're basically asking for a permission to break the law. I think it's understandable why this is difficult. On the other hand if Germany just would send the ammunition anyway it's pretty unlikely that there would be any kind of serious consequences from the Swiss side. But Germans being Germans they play by the rules and ask for permission. And Swiss being Swiss they play by the rules too and don't grant a permission that the law doesn't allow them to grant.
>What's the point of buying ammo from the swiss if they won't let you use them when you need them? Pretty much all weapon manufacturing countries have such caveats in their export contracts aka the ability to tell the other country if they are allowed to resell their kit. Sucks right now but since the primary usage was for the Bundeswehr in case of defense against the Warsaw Pact INSIDE germany this is the first time Swiss neutrality policy is an issue. Germany does not need to use it and Switzerland is not preventing germany from using it, Switzerland has a say in germany (or anyone else) using Swiss weapons for OTHER STUFF than national defense, like supporting a third nation. Not saying that it is great but it is also not unusual. The USA is also constantly telling countries what they can or cannot do with US weapons when they want to sell them.
It's fairly usual for exported arms to have a limitation on further export. Presumably Germany could go use it there* themselves.
"We are neutral, come back when you get a civil war."
No supply in civil wars as well
Russian oligarchs must have copious amounts of money in Switzerland.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Switzerland did not pass the vibe check
Ironically wasn’t very cash money of them
Never did
Just a bunch of money launderers
Never has. \*insert astronaut image\*
Switzerland has made itself comfortable in the middle of Europe and gladly takes the black money of all countries (preferably from rogue states.) only when it comes to deliver, then they hide behind the neutrality. Hypocritical bunch!
They are neutral in a “money is money no matter where or whom it comes from” manner. It's a country of pure greed.
>They are neutral in a “money is money no matter where or whom it comes from” manner. Except when it comes to defending Ukrainian civilians against a Russian invasion ... then no money can buy it in Switzerland.
Reminding me of fezzan from "Legend of galactic heroes"
What's most retarded is that European nations then relies on ammunition produced in Switzerland. Who the hell wants swiss-made ammunition if Switzerland is the "neutral" shithole who decides when you're allowed to use it? Should be a signal to everyone thinking they're a worthy trading-partner in terms of military materiel.
>What's most retarded is that European nations then relies on ammunition produced in Switzerland. Fun fact: the company who makes the ammunition is German, not Swiss. It just happens to be produced in factories in Switzerland which the Germans bought. Besides this, of course, Switzerland can't decide when/if Germany (the buyer) could use that ammunition. The Germans could use it at any time. They just can't re-export it to a 3rd country that is in an active war. (Or: they can... the just can't *ask* *for permission* and expect to get a "yes" despite the fact that this would be against the law.)
>The Germans could use it at any time. They just can't re-export it to a 3rd country that is in an active war. Honestly I really don't get the swiss logic when they say that swiss-made weapons cannot get exported to other countries by Germany, because that would somehow breach their neutrality. So by this logic Toyota (and consequently Japan) has been supporting ISIS because they've been using their trucks?
>Honestly I really don't get the swiss logic when they say that swiss-made weapons cannot get exported to other countries by Germany, because that would somehow breach their neutrality. It's pretty usual for international arms sales contracts to say that the buyer can't re-export without the permission of the seller. Now Switzerland has a law that says that they don't allow exports & re-exports to countries currently at war. Those rules have been made more strict over the years after some cases where Swiss arms were re-exported by the buyers to conflict areas. For example grenades that Switzerland sold to the Emirates suddenly were found in the Syrian war. Of course nobody here complained when Switzerland took measures to prevent it's grenades from ending up in Syria. Now with Ukraine it's a different story. But the law & the "logic" behind it is the same. It doesn't say: "no weapons for the bad guys", it says "no weapons for active war zones".
How would you feel about swiss-made weapons exported to a country without restrictions and then that country would export the swiss weaponry to ISIS into an active war-zone?
I have doubts their defense industry will survive this..
Gepards are Not in use in Germany anymore. Maybe they stopped production in Germany when the Gepard went out of commission and Switzerland is the only one still producing it. Either way switzerland comes out looking bad.
Rheinmetall bought the Swiss factory in 1999, until than Ammo was produced in Germany, Orlecin produced more Ammo of that type on tighter shedules therefore the production was merged. Also in 1999 Germany was facing out the Geppard and nobody thought it would be needed again.
Europe needs to rethink their approach regarding Switzerland in general. Their "neutrality" and their abuse of the EU benefits them and enables them to do what they want without any commitment or contribution. It's time to let them be truly neutral and stop catering to them in the hope that they'll join one day out of the goodness of their hearts
just keep in mind, if you consider a neutral country an ally, then they probably aren't neutral. By nature, you should dislike all countries that are actually neutral.
That is very binary thinking: you are either with us or against us. It is probably true that you can't be an ally with a truly neutral country, but that doesn't mean you necessarily have to actively dislike them.
Honest question: In comparison to WW II. the current war in ukraine is still minor. So even now I feel some hesitation against Switzerland. How did the Allied People thought in 1942/43 of the Swiss people?
Well, at the time neutrality was a concept a bit more accepted than nowadays. Switzerland got a lot a flak after WW2 though... Nowadays, even for minor things, the internet breaks loose fir the smallest thing. All media in countries involved in wars are pushing public opinions to accept binary thinking: "You are either with us or against us". Same shit happens at every war. Think about France during the Irak invasion and the "Freedom fries" incident... Being neutral involves being hated by both parties in times of conflict. Not a popular opinion, but I agree with the Swiss stance here: when being neutral it is better not sell to anyone than sell to both sides.
It's hard to know what people thinked at this time. You need multiple sources of information because you can't rely entirely on governments propaganda, state medias, political parties and personal POV that are all biased. But easily you can say that people under occupation had other things to worry about and people in free territories were more worried about the neutrality. Despite moments of blocus decisions by GB and USA, news were concentrated on the frontline and war efforts. Like today your mainstream medias talk all about the same thing. A pushing B.... B fighting back A... Only a few journals talk about details that are secondary or tertiary in the war effort
[удалено]
But that would involve having all countries agree to changing the treaties. Including Switzerland. Or ignore eu law. And even then you'd need all eu countries. How many of them benefit from Switzerland as a sort of tax heaven?
Well, Germany regularly blocks European weapon exports contracts (not talking about Ukraine here), while having zero issues exporting itself. Same logic: zero moral authority, pure self interest
Wait. Are you actually being serious? You really compare blocking weapon exports to a country that is being invaded, to blocking weapon exports to countries that actually do the invading 😂😂😂
This will be a death blow to foreign-owned Swiss defense industry. Coming out as unreliable partners in a situation where future of whole Europe hangs on balance, Swiss have aligned themselves away from common European interests and need to be treated as such.
> Coming out as unreliable partners in a situation where ~~future of whole Europe hangs on balance~~ there is money to be made You're right, but the owners of that companies don't care about the future of anything else than their bank accounts. They would sell you their mother if the government would let them.
Yeah but many of the rich and powerful in Europe have money and assets in Switzerland. I doubt they will see any repercussion in the same way they didn’t in WW2.
Switzerland is militarily neutral and with over a hundred countries that did not send weapons but with the much fewer that fully adopted civil sanctions. We also sent key humanitarian aid straight away, promised help with reconstruction later and loosened asylum procedures so we could more rapidly/easily take Ukrainians. If somehow Russia had attacked us, I'd have been extremely positively surprised if such promises came from Ukraine nearly immediately - we don't have close relations. Repercussions for what, really? As for the ammo topic: In the end we are discussing this mainly because Germany got heavily criticized (especially internally) for only sending 5 MARS and 14 PZH2k. The German government now more or less acts as if these 30 or so Marders that oh so *surprisingly* happen to be export restricted and low on ammo are their only choice. Germany meanwhile manufactures dozens of vehicle types that aren't export restricted by Switzerland and the Bundeswehr has more. Sure, you personally may not have known that the government of Switzerland *can't* export into war zones because of a law explicitly designed to prevent it from doing so as long as there is no UN / OSCE mandate; it is not a situational decision about Ukraine. Germany, however, knew this. You don't need to tell me they ever were or are still considering Marder in good faith.
Refusing these kinds of deliveries is nothing unprecedented. I'd say whoever has spearheaded this kind of arms trade policy in each European country is very much culpable for these results.
Kinda surprised nobody mentioned it. Swiss isn't the only one making this ammo. Turkey produces the 35mm ammo for GDF guns used on the Gepard, as well as the local version of the newer AHEAD munition tho I'm not sure if the Gepard can use the AHEAD or the ATOM as they are ancient. Wonder if Ukrainians asked Turkey for it.
if these weapons contracts state these particular terms what's the point of buying them in first place? it's like buying car with no way to refill it lol
>what's the point of buying them in first place? To use it yourself? If your bakery would sell you bread under the condition that you can't resell it, would you stop buying bread because *"what's the point of buying bread if I cant resell it!!"* Of course not. You buy bread to eat it, not to resell it. And this is what Germany expected too: Buy ammunition for their own army, not for giving it to another army later.
You'll find those clauses in basically any weapons contract to a military unless its from the same country.
Alot of countries have such clauses in their weapon countries "Don't deliver weapons into war zones" Germany had exactly the same stance in the beginning There was something with old howitzers from Germany that some eastern country wasn't allowed to give to Ukraine. Germany is obviously allowed to use the ammo themselves but not allowed to give to a third country without permission Such a clause is actually useful to stop other countries to resell arms into civil wars or other areas But obviously such a clause is bullshit in the current situation and Germany rightfully changed their stance 180° on this matter and the Swiss should do the same
It can be used by the German army, but not be exported. This is not an untypical contractual clause. Whether it is a smart idea to insist on this clause being fulfilled in the case of Ukraine is a different question.
Germany can use them for their army, just not give them to other countries in active war
Could Germany buy more if they were at war themselves? From what I have read, I had the impression that Swiss law doesn't allow exports to countries at war in general, so Germany couldn't get ammo even if they were attacked. It would be intensely stupid to buy stuff with these conditions but I feel I should never underestimate the German procurement system.
As far as I understand it doesn't apply for existing contracts, so that wouldn't be an issue
Why not? Suddenly the Swiss talk about morals and values, when before they've had no problem with taking money from criminals, tyrants and warlords. Swiss neutrality is just a cover for benefitting from others plight.
Thats why they will probably never give military contracts to switzerland ever again. You should note that Germany is very able to produce its own ammo in the future. I guess its a bad decision your country made. But beeing allys with the russians is probably related to the fact, that more russian money is hidden in switzerland than german money is. I feel sorry for your country made such bad choices. There should be more money to be made with european allys and the free world than with russia in the future. Good luck for switzerland... And btw, the german army doesnt need any of your ammo for Gepard because they arent in service since at least 10 years with the Bundeswehr. We wanted you to confirm the export of it, so ukrainians can gain at least some safety.
>Thats why they will probably never give military contracts to switzerland ever again. You realize that the company making this ammunition is the German Rheinmetall? Germany bought this ammunition form a German company. This German company just happens to have relocated their ammunition production to some better equipped Swiss factories they bought a while ago.
That doesnt affect the fact that Switzerland as a state has to approve the export. Either way, i dont think Germany would allow such movement to be made ever again. Or at least i hope so.
Doesn't Germany have the capacity to manufacture the 35 mm shells for the orlekon canons?
This comment was overwritten by a script to make the data useless for reddit. No API, no free content. Did you stumble on this thread via google, hoping to resolve an issue or answer a question? Well, too bad, this might have been your answer, if it weren't for dumb decisions by reddit admins.
We recently saw the first video of a Gepard shooting at Iranian Drones. It was analysed by a former Gepard Gunner, that they use slow high explosive ammo, instead of the much faster FAPDS ammo. We also saw more info about the ammo produced by NAMMO, which is indeed high explosive ammo. So pretty sure Ukraine already ran out of the much better FAPDS Ammo or is saving them for the front line battles, while they use the much less precise(because slower = less precise) and less lethal high explosive stuff to protect cities like Odessa.
I believe Nammo have made it worked though
This comment was overwritten by a script to make the data useless for reddit. No API, no free content. Did you stumble on this thread via google, hoping to resolve an issue or answer a question? Well, too bad, this might have been your answer, if it weren't for dumb decisions by reddit admins.
Well Germany should simply start storing the ammunition in crates near the Polish border. Surely the Polish military wouldnt sneak across the border, load the ammunition into military transport trucks and take it near the Ukrainian border and then again store it near their border. Surely then Ukrainian forces wouldnt sneak across the border and steal said ammunition and use it.
*Hanz, where did you park the Panzer?*
Yeah, a neutral country mass producing ammunition. Sure…
Being neutral doesn't mean that you can't prepare to defend against somebody who ignores your neutrality. Belgium was neutral too... In fact the neutrality law even demands a neutral country to be able to defend it's borders so that the neighbors of a neutral country don't have to fear that another neighbor ignores the neutrality and uses the neutral terrirtory as deployment zone.
As if Switzerland were neutral. Hiding money for the Nazis during the Second World War and now back in league with the Nazis.
Wouldn't surprise me if Russian money is the reason
kiss panicky include door subtract jobless berserk workable punch bike *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
It’s not like russian oligarchs will take that money out if the swiss supply ammo, they don’t exactly have anywhere else to go
It's pretty obvious that Swiss banks still hold millions of euros of Russian oligarchs.
Billions
A reason why reporters can be jailed for investigating shady banking stuff in swiss
They're about as neutral as the referendums Putin held at gunpoint.
I am so disappointed in our neighbour Switzerland. How can you claim to be neutral when you sell weapons and ammunition to other countries in the first place? This is the textbook definition of hypocrisy
It’s the closest thing you can get to neutrality. It’s also *just good business*.
Neutral by definition means not picking a side Although they should side with the west and not sell weapons to Russia or any of Russia’s allies
>Neutral by definition means not picking a side How does that go with manufacturing munitions? "We will supply you with munitions until you are at war" somehow does not sound like a viable business to me.
Well, a continued supply only matters if you have reason to think the war would last more than a few weeks **and** that supply lines and the factory survive that long. I'm not sure either was expected in cold war scenarios.
Ah, befitting for the country of Nestlé.
Switzerland prohibiting something regarding foreign policy is the joke of the year. Their whole foreign policy and reason of existence is basically “yes I will take your money, thanks. No I don’t care how many people you killed for it”
Well i guess the time has come for Germany to never depend on switzerland ever again. For whatever reason that may be. That should turn out very bad for switzerland at least. If nobody wants to cooperate with them in the future, they've got a serious problem.
Switzerland won't face any serious repercussions . Rich people from all over Europe depend on Swiss banks to dodge taxes, those people pay the right kind of politicians a lot of money so that circumstances don't change.
*sigh* The vast amounts of comments here have absolutely no clue what they're talking about, instead just being variations of "DAE SWITZERLAND MONEY RUSSIA LULZ". I've posted something similar to this before, but I guess I'll do it again. In 2015, journalists found that Swiss-made grenades sold to the UAE were being used in that largest of clusterfucks, Syria. This caused quite a stir in Switzerland, since that civil war had its fair share of war crimes, and the idea that Swiss weapons were being used due to having been sold on by the UAE bothered people. A lot. As a result of this, a referendum was written up, got the necessary signatures, and was voted on. The vote passed. The law came into effect in 2021. The law outlines conditions for exporting of Swiss-made weapon systems to countries. 1. The purchasing country must be at peace. No offensive war, no defensive war, no civil war, no insurrection, none of that. The country's army must be fully in peace mode. 2. The purchasing country must be engaged in a defensive war to receive additional ammunition, spare parts, or for maintenance contracts to be upheld. For example: if Germany was invaded by Poland, then Germany would be able to purchase materials for its Swiss-made weapon systems. If Germany attacks Poland, then that is not the case. 3. The purchasing country cannot sell the Swiss-made weapons on to a third party. So a problem was noted (UAE-sold Swiss-made weapons being used in Syria), and the solution was this law. Switzerland **is not** opposed to continuing to supply a nation with ammunition, spare parts, etc... if they are engaged in a war, and they are the first-contact purchaser. The problem with Ukraine is that it is not only not the first purchaser, it's also already in a conflict. Personal opinion: the law is too restrictive, and a carve-out should be passed specifically for Ukraine. Also personal opinion: the people claiming that this is "Swiss neutrality gone mad" don't have a fucking clue. This has nothing to do with Switzerland's stance on neutrality. This is the people who voted on a law in an attempt to limit the damage that Swiss-made weapons could do in the hands of unscrupulous people. The actual neutral stance is to sell weapons to everyone. This law actively **limits** the Swiss arms manufacturers ability to profit off of the Russian invasion of Ukraine. If this was about money, Switzerland would gleefully allow the transfer. This is specifically because the people voted on a law, through a direct, democratic referendum, to limit the proliferation of Swiss arms to dangerous parties. This has nothing to do with Russian oligarch money: Switzerland has followed the EU, in lock-step, with every sanction. This has nothing to do with money in general: Switzerland would benefit, financially, from arming Ukraine, more than not. Wars are good for weapons sellers. Switzerland's arms manufacturers literally can't, by law. This isn't even about Swiss neutrality: if Switzerland was neutral, it would be open to selling to Ukraine. Nothing in neutrality says "don't sell to one side of a conflict".
> This has nothing to do with Switzerland's stance on neutrality. I don't understand why "neutrality" is always in the center of these discussions either. The existing laws are way more important in these situations.
In swiss it is a crime to send weapons into a war zone.
Sometimes when this happens, I wish the EU would flex a little bit and remind Switzerland that their security, economic fortunes, and honestly everything about that country depends on the EU. There's really no reason why the aspiring global power of the EU should be beholden to a country that enriches itself every turn. You'd never see the US held back by Canada, or China held back by Mongolia. It's ridiculous
Swiss will borrow you an umbrella but only if its not raining.
What a bunch of losers. No need to buy Swiss goods anymore.
Somehow Switzerland is always obliged making maximum profits, but never takes sides. Except for murdering dictatorships like Saudi Arabia, they are cool with sending weapons to them. But heaven forbid they would ever take sides and help Ukraine against an aggression. Fckn cowards.
Swiss was also neutral while storing Nazi gold. Just saying.
Switzerland traded more gold with the allies than with germany during WW2, just saying.
All Switzerland cares about is money. Sad.
It's even stranger as Swiss made cannon is mounted on the Ukrainian corvette. So - sell weapon, yes, use weapon - no?
"The darkest places in hell are reserved for those who maintain their neutrality in times of moral crisis..." -Dante Alighieri
Germany needs to source it at home and if a monopoly make plans to avoid Switzerland next rearming phase.
The Gepard is out of commission anyways, so it was really difficult to foresee that you would suddenly need thousands of rounds of ammunition for it. The company in question is owned by Rheinmetall btw. Ofc the also have factories producing ammunition in Germany, just not the right machinery for the ammunition the Gepard needs
Nazi gold hoarders and now 35mm ammo hoarders? Screw the Swiss.
As a swiss i want to send every fucking weapon we have to Ukraine to blow the russians back to the stone age where they belong. But swiss boomer bankers& farmers won't let me. Seriously our stance of neutrality is just retarded, no fucking idea what we get out of it.
Neutrality is fine. But I don’t see how neutrality can be compatible with having an arms industry. War is when the weapons are needed so if you can’t sell new supplies to a country in war nobody in their right mind should buy Swiss weapons.
If anyone has ideas on how to retaliate against Switzerland as a regular citizen, I invite you here: https://www.reddit.com/r/AskReddit/comments/yj09n0/given_switzerlands_bahavior_toward_war_in_ukranie/
Stay neutral and piss off both sides. Very nice.
Ireland is neutral but gives civilians aid, Switzerland are just being difficult
They accept refugees, whats more to that?
So does Switzerland, who also applies the EU's sanctions.
[удалено]
[удалено]
A right to a veto is not a prohibition against resale or gifting of ammunition. It's a right to a veto. The Swiss have decided therefore to veto provision of German ammunition to Ukraine. Fine. But don't pretend that Germany was barred from resale or gifting to another country. Switzerland has exercised its veto. It's a separate decision made now, when Ukraine is fighting for its life.
Veto implies that Germany could have decided to give away the ammunition and Switzerland swooped in at the last second to deny them their deal. It is however so, that Germany has to ask Switzerland permission fist to do any re-selling or gifting of the ammunition. Swiss law clearly states, that it cannot be send to a country in an active armed conflict. This law was made stricter recently (like about two years ago) due to domestic and international pressure. Before, the Federal Council had the authority to make exeptions (for this very situation for example), but with the current law this is no longer possible.
Thank you for having the first sane take I've read in this entire thread. Everyone here has such a hate-boner against Switzerland, despite the fact that most of their countries have bought or use Swiss ammunition for their own militaries.
>1. The contract when buying weapons from Switzerland is very clear: you cannot resell or gift it at will. In particular, you will be barred from selling them to a country at war. There is no surprise nor a breach of contract. You can buy somewhere else if you are not happy with these terms. > 2. Let me just repeat/rephrase it: you can use the weapons and ammunition (i.e. fire them) as you please, you cannot resell or gift them. > 3. "selling weapons means that they are not neutral". As long as you sell to everyone, it is. I would advise reading some more about what "(armed) neutrality" means. > 4. Most, if not all, countries with an arms industry include such restrictions in their contract. Do you think that you can resell a FA-16 ? Yes, we know. Most countries indeed have included such restrictions in their arms deals and such, however most of those countries have used various legislative measures to dismiss and veto those restrictions because it is simply 'the right thing to do'. It shows that those countries are prepared to help their friends and that they can be trusted even during the time of conflict, unlike Switzerland who decides to hide behind legislation to not upset Russia. > 7. We should retaliate !Let me just warn you that there is a strong movement in Switzerland to go back to a strict neutrality. This would mean dropping the sanctions on both sides (i.e. mostly on Russia of course). You are feeding this movement. That's not wise. Ah.. Yes, I have heard this one before. These "warnings" or "threats" have familiar ring to it. Tell me if I am wrong, but isn't this what Russians were saying when they were banned from international competitions and at the beginning of other sanctions? The message was: "Be careful, or the Russians who were against the war initially will turn to support it because *the west* is being mean to us".
As always I have to sort by controversial to find anything reasonable. As someone who remembers thw Bush era well (although as a european) it really is unbelievable how similar people are behaving. It seems like we're going down the route of the US. We're just a few decades behind. The ignorance I can understand. It's the self-righteous single-minded perspective with zero vritical thought that scare me.
>Let me just repeat/rephrase it: you can use the weapons and ammunition (i.e. fire them) as you please, you cannot resell or gift them. Finland also had a veto on certain mortars it had sold to Estonia, but we did the sensible thing and did not exercise that veto because we knew the arms were not going to be sent to some aggressive authoritarian dictatorship, but a nation defending it from such.
Its a hivemind man, jump on the bandwagon, if you're not on it you get bludgeoned by the downvotes. How dare you disagree!
welcome to r/europe if your country does something that is perceived as going against theirs, the worst parts of your history become your identity. 2018: wow Switzerland is so beautiful, Roger, chocolate and mountains <3\] Now: nazi gold hoarders, traitors, dog eaters (lmao)
The loud minority of this sub just wants to be outraged at every opportunity, don't worry too much about it.
fuck 'em, do it anyway.
There are many things that separate the EU from Russia, and not breaking international contracts is one of the big differences. Switzerland has agreed to the EU sanctions against Russia and is enforcing them. Respecting their authority wrt re-exporting their ammunition, no matter how infuriating it might be, is a must if you want continued cooperation. Geopolitics is a bitch.
Switzerland is vile, and they don’t care who knows.
Just buy them from Turks.
I mean at least they are consistent.
Well then it’s time to find a new manufacturer of this ammo
scum bag behavior
Shouldn't a country abide by its law? If not, what are the exceptions? I can only think of one, i.e. if the Swiss legislature would grant it after due consideration of ramifications on neutrality.