Video Flagged Dead

shooting range for jet fighters (with spectators watching)

oligopolsays...

That's actually a good question. the swiss have always felt kind of being isolated in europe and it's still pretty much this way. first, in the middle ages, they were a bunch of farmers who ruled themselves (instead of having nobles to do so) and gained their independence in lots of wars against their neighbours (territories of noble families such as the habsburg-dynasty) between 1300 and 1525. (imagine how popular you get, when your "army" of 1500 peasants beat 4000 well equiped knights) and later, the swiss where the only one in europe to transfer their republic in a modern democracy (they basically copied the us-constituion in 1848) while the other countries were still monarchies. there were numerous occasions where a war could have broken out (with germany). only england and the "sister republic" USA (as ben franklin once called it) supported the tiny country (30'000 sq. miles(!) so this whole "not being a part of europe, being the lone wolf", is deep in the swiss psyche and manifests itself by switzerlands hesitation to join international organisations (un not until 2002, eu no, nato no) and vice versa by the lack of understanding by many european countries for the basic democratic system in switzerland (all important issues decided by referenda, no full-time members of parliamet, no single "leaders" - mayors, governors, presidents - but only collective bodies - town council, governmental council - federal council) with that in mind and especially the experience of being rounded up by a hostile force in the 2nd world war, it's no surprise that the swiss always felt they had to be armed and well prepared. but things were worse than today. during the cold war, (where switzerland strongly opposed the soviet union but wasn't part of nato) there were 650'000 (militia)soldiers, 500+ battle tanks, 1500 m113-apc and 300+ jet fighters awaiting the red invasion. nowadays, the army, reduced to 200'000 with 300 leo2 battle tanks and 50 F-18 and 100 f-5, shrunk considerably and is desperately looking for new tasks. (note: there's a peoples initiative called "gsoa - movement for a switzerland without army", that urged for a referendum to abolish the army that was approved by 30% of voters in 2001).
but it's a long way to go until we'll be a "normal" country, i'm always reminded of this when i see my automatic rifle in the closet. (they hand out the full equipment to the soldier - every man between 20 and 35 - to be able to fully mobilise in 48 hours). strange? yes, indeed. but of course, beside that, the country offers great things: the highest quality of living (according to a study, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zurich), extensive public transport - trains running to and from everywhere from 5am to 1am, low taxes, a liberal (gay marriage approved by referenda) and in general environmental friendly policy and a society, that is able to integrate 1 million refugees only with minor problems, one of the lowest crime rates in the world and so on....probably not the worst place to live - at least as long as more money is spent on public transport than on defence. and if life gets too boring, you're in paris, berlin, rome, within 4-8 h, by train or car...

and because of the ill-gotten wealth. that's an tough point. are your refering to the banking deals with the nazis? well, that's a point. but banks are not the most important companies that contribute to our wealth (i only mention insurances, chemical industry, tourism, machine industry, computer industry - guess where the tft-lcd display technology was researched and where logitech was founded). in 1848 - see above - switzerland was the poorest country in europe. with democracy and individual (economical) freedom there came growth and by 1914 it was an industrialised country just as the rest of europe. then this rest decided to go to war, to kill each other and to end the world as it was known. switzerland took care of the refugees and feared german invasion, but not more. so our country survived relatively unharmed. then a few years later, the nazis took power in our neigbour country to the north. the first anti-nazi comments where published the same day in the zurich based german language newspaper "neue zürcher zeitung" what had the consequence, that swiss newspapers where banned in germany from then on. switzerland was also the only country in europe, where extremist parties (left and right) were NEVER in the parliament. lot's of german (jewish or not) refugees came to switzerland but most moved to the US when the war broke out. when the war broke out, suddenly there were only germany and german occupied territory around. as a country heavily depending on imports (no natural resources except water and stone), switzerland had to arrange itself with germany. the swiss were guaranteed coal and steel imports and germany got the right to ship goods in sealed trains through the country to its ally italy. the swiss struggled to produce the necessary food that was needed. football stadiums, parks and gardens were used to plant potatoes. 20'000 bunkers and 10'000 km of anti tank walls were built because the only question in peoples minds was when the germans invade, not if. german air force planes flew into swiss airspace to provoke airfights. (ironically, the swiss shot down several of them). but as it was pointed out in recent years, other things happened. a super dutifully swiss bureaucrat suggested the "j" stamp in german passports for jewish citizens! a bunch of right wing politicians said "the boat is full", meaning that no more refugees should be allowed to cross borders. and banks (independent companies) made business with slaughters. but what did the government do? they tried their best to keep switzerland out of the war without giving up freedom and democracy - there was no censorship - facing the immense problem of imports. and the people? german speaking swiss (60%) are traditionally anti-german, french speaking (30%) saw the fate of france and the italian speaking strongly opposed the italian fascists as well - also because fascists both in italy and germany always kind of pointed out that the swiss who spoke their language should actually be part of their respective "reichs". and there were not at least brave individuals, such as border-guards who - risking their own lives - helped refugees whether jews, gypsies or socialists cross the border "illegally". after the war, sure, switzerland was the only country whose cities were not destroyed. and that gave us a advance in the economical recovery. but i think, much more than this cruel examples of immoral, disgusting and greedy behaviour, the fact that switzerland is a very stable country with grass-root-democracy and a highly skilled labour force (in minimum speaking 3 languages, 2 of the country and english) as well as its geographical position in the middle of europe are responsible for the economical success. of course, we should never forget what happened, and we must keep on studying our past, that such things will never happen again. but i think thats more or less true for every country or society....

sorry 'bout the much too long answer. hope your question was not a rhetorical one...

joedirtsays...

Sorry, I was being rhetorical. And yes, the original rant was probably not seriously asking why there is an airforce. We are taught in our sham of history education in the states about Swiss being 'neutral'. Sorry for us talk-alot-never-listen yanks. Anyways, I enjoyed reading your informative post.

oligopolsays...

thanks for your comment. i had a little time but first hesitated to write such a long answer. glad that at least one read it and found it informative. you don't have to apologise of course especially not for your fellow citizens our your school system. if they teach you, the swiss are/were neutral, thats not wrong. the question only is: what is "neutral". our neutrality is basically a military one. that means: not taking part in any conflict. not selling weapons to any side. maintaining diplomatic relations with both parties. not let any party use our territory and/or airspace. that's how it has been more or less since the middle ages. but this says nothing about what the people (or the government) think. in 1848 democratic revolutions took place in germany - they failed. the leader of this movements came to switzerland and got a hearty welcome. that caused big tension with the german monarchies (especially prussia) who demanded immediate extradition - that was not granted. again, in 1871 the swiss mainly supported the more democratic french in the franco-prussian war. same procedure in 1914 (france then being the only real democracy in europe beside switzerland) and in 1939. so, the swiss were always far from being "neutral" in the sense of "i don't care". but as a country, we officialy were and still are.
today, we have problems defining our neutrality. regarding the israel-lebanon war, one of our federal councillors (a member of the 7-member collective government) said, that, if international laws are broken and crimes against humanity are commited, the one who remains silent is not neutral, but is actively taking part by approving what happens. now the discussion is in, if this is a new definition of our neutrality or not. some say, even an expression like that from a member of the government would be against neutrality... i'm really looking forward to the process of this discussion and if ever a final decision will be made, it will probably become manifest in a referendum. what not necessarily simplifies complicated things....

now it's my turn to apologize to you all for using the comment function for derisory long answers...

Send this Article to a Friend



Separate multiple emails with a comma (,); limit 5 recipients






Your email has been sent successfully!

Manage this Video in Your Playlists




notify when someone comments
X

This website uses cookies.

This website uses cookies to improve user experience. By using this website you consent to all cookies in accordance with our Privacy Policy.

I agree
  
Learn More