Switzerland imported gold from Russia in May for the first time since February, Bloomberg reported on Tuesday. According to the article, the move suggests that the industry’s stance toward Russian precious metals may be softening.

Switzerland shipped more than 3 tons of gold from Russia last month, Bloomberg cited data from the Swiss Federal Customs Administration. The purchase represents about 2% of Swiss bullion imports in May. The country is a key refining hub that handles two-thirds of the world’s gold.

Following the start of Moscow’s military operation in Ukraine and the rollout of international sanctions, the London Bullion Market Association suspended all Russian gold and silver refineries from its list of approved suppliers. The move was viewed by the industry as a de facto ban and most refiners refused to accept new gold from Russia.

This comes as the precious metal has been flagged as a possible new target for sanctions against Moscow. According to a Reuters report on Tuesday, EU leaders want to keep up pressure on Russia as they gather for a summit this week.

It is not clear if Switzerland, which is not part of the EU, will comply with the possible ban on Russian gold.

 

READ MORE:

https://www.rt.com/business/557557-switzerland-buys-russian-gold/

 

 

READ FROM TOP.

 

 

FREE JULIAN ASSANGE NOW.....................

 

Swiss neutrality law and policy must not be allowed to sink into the din of war

 

by Dr iur. Marianne Wüthrich

 

In Current Concerns of 10 and 24 May, it has already been reported that the Swiss Federal Council had jettisoned the neutrality policy it had built up over centuries virtually overnight and decided on the 1:1 adoption of EU sanctions against the Russian state as well as against private assets. In doing so, the Federal Council has “caused a lot of damage”, said Federal Councillor Ueli Maurer in a newspaper interview. 

The “damage” continues to expand. In the meantime, we are already talking about “closer cooperation” with NATO beyond the Partnership for Peace (PfP) (demanded by FDP President Thierry Burkart, in agreement with Viola Amherd, Head of the Federal Department of Defence, Civil Protection and Sport, DDPS, as well as about arms deliveries to the war state Ukraine.

Clear legal situation

Everyone, at least in NATO countries, has understood that Switzerland, as a neutral country, is not allowed to sell weapons directly to a warring party. Currently, however, Germany and Denmark have asked the Federal Council whether they are allowed to deliver war material purchased in Switzerland to Ukraine. The legal situation is clear: they are not. This is because, firstly, the law of neutrality requires that Switzerland would have to treat Russia in the same way as Ukraine in the event of a request, and secondly, Switzerland has a strict War Material Act(WMA). Not only does it prohibit the direct export of military equipment to warring countries, but Switzerland also requires a declaration by the government concerned that war material will not be re-exported (KMG Art. 18 para. 1). Denmark and Germany signed such declarations at the time. On the basis of Swiss law, the State Secretariat for Economic Affairs (SECO) rejected Germany’s application in April and Denmark’s in May.

Pressure from NATO-foreign countries is one thing … 

As the editors of the “Tages-Anzeiger” found out from a “confidential Federal Council paper” (!), in Davos, in addition to NATO Secretary General Stoltenberg, a number of defence ministers tried to persuade the head of the DDPS, Federal Councillor Viola Amherd, not to be so strict with Swiss legislation. Even US Deputy Secretary of Defence Kathleen H. Hicks paid her respects.1 One sometimes wonders why an increasing number of Western countries are appointing women without any military experience as ministers of defence – perhaps we have the answer here: It is probably relatively easy for officers and chiefs of staff in their own country as well as for NATO generals to “get their ideas across”, to put it diplomatically, to people such as a former advocate and member of the board of Migros Valais with zero days of service in the Swiss army.

 … the docility of the DDPS is another

In any case, the NATO representatives were successful with Federal Councillor Amherd: on 3 June, the DDPS on its own initiative gave the green light for another request by Germany, namely the export of former Swiss battle tanks which Switzerland “no longer needed” (Did we really no longer need them?) and had therefore sold back to the German manufacturer Rheinmetall 11 years ago. The approval of the “transfer of surplus material from former or current stocks of the Armed Forces” did not fall under the War Material Act and lay within the sole competence of the DDPS, the Department said in its media release of 3 June 2022. Well, from a legal point of view, that does make some sense: Switzerland probably had to be happy that Rheinmetall bought back the “surplus” tanks at a discount (at the expense of Swiss taxpayers and the security of the population), so they couldn’t impose any more conditions.
  At the same time, the DDPS rejected a second request from the Polish government to buy decommissioned tanks from the Swiss army, because such a deal would have to be approved by parliament and the procedure in Switzerland would take some time.
  The real bombshell, however, is the third decision of the head of the DDPS and her entourage to hand over to Great Britain multi-role weapons of the type NLAW ordered from Saab in Sweden, which were to have been delivered to Switzerland in 2022/23. Following the delivery of similar weapons to Ukraine, the UK wants to increase its own stocks. At the request of London, the DDPS is now generously “letting Great Britain go first”, and we will wait until the end of 2024 for the deliveries to which we are legitimately entitled. The DDPS vividly describes what such weapons can be used for by the Ukrainians in the Donbass: they “serve to engage enemy tanks, armoured personnel carriers (APC’s) and other vehicles at medium and long ranges, as well as to breach fortified enemy positions or buildings to enable friendly forces to penetrate”.2
  Such processes in Switzerland – which is neutral by law! – must deeply repulse and alarm every humanly feeling contemporary: The unspeakable profiteering in the Western “world of values”, a shifting around of lethal weapons with the highest prospects of profit – like on a Monopoly board – which literally goes over corpses, over tens of thousands of corpses! And this is where Switzerland is supposed to join in and take part? 

Not all Federal Councillors falter

The State Secretariat for Economic Affairs (SECO), which rejected the German and Danish requests mentioned at the beginning, is part of the Federal Department of Economic Affairs, Education and Research (EAER), headed by Federal Councillor Guy Parmelin. He did not let himself be put off by his Council colleague’s pandering to the opinion-makers at the WEF, nor by the insistence of the German and Danish governments on a licence for the re-export of tank ammunition and wheeled armoured infantry fighting vehicles respectively, but sought the support of his colleagues in the Federal Council. German Vice-Chancellor Robert Habeck told the Bundesrat at the WEF that Germany had also ruled out arms exports to warring countries before the Russian attack on Ukraine. He and his party, the Greens, have now changed their mind: “We have to measure our own stance against reality”, says Habeck.3 In fact, the party cadres of the German Greens measure their stance “against reality” insofar as they adapt it to the mainstream every now and then.
  On 3 June, the Federal Council as a whole confirmed the SECO’s decisions in no uncertain terms, despite all attempts at pressure: “According to the War Material Act, exports of war material are to be rejected if the country of destination is involved in an international armed conflict. Russia and Ukraine are in such a conflict. Since exports from Switzerland to Ukraine cannot be approved on the basis of the neutrality principle and the War Material Act, approval for the transfer of Swiss war material by Germany and Denmark to Ukraine is also not possible.”4 In the same decision, however, the Federal Council approved the applications of two Swiss companies that wanted to supply individual parts and assemblies to defence companies in Germany and Italy. According to Federal Council practice, this is possible up to a certain proportion of the end product. So, a bit of compromise policy after all ...

Own team against Switzerland: attempted dismantling of the state system from within

It doesn’t knock it out of the park: The small state of Switzerland can better cope with the insolence of a Kathleen H. Hicks from the USA or a Robert Habeck from our northern neighbour if our own team remembers that we have a unique counter-model to defend. Unfortunately, the Swiss mainstream media and some top politicians are not fulfilling this task in any way. The good news is that there are also politicians who insist on respecting neutrality and the law.

Some examples of the dismantling clique

• Councillor of States Thierry Burkart, President of the Free Democratic Party, wants to write into the War Material Act (KMG) that the re-export of Swiss war material should be permitted by “democratic constitutional states”. The same politician also calls for “closer cooperation with NATO”. This fits together well: By “democratic states under the rule of law” Burkart means the EU/NATO states, which could then resupply Swiss weapons to all wars of the USA and its satellites.
• Tamedia editor-in-chief Arthur Rutishauser: In his opinion, Switzerland’s deal with the UK and the Saab company “can hardly be reconciled with what is commonly understood by neutrality.” He is right about that – but instead of insisting on compliance with the neutrality requirement, he points to the expectation of “friendly nations” that Switzerland “declares solidarity with Europe, at least in part”. This is why Rutishauser sympathises with Burkart’s amendment to the KMG, although he admits: “Of course, such an arrangement would run the risk of circumventing the Swiss Arms Export Law, but at least this would not be actively controlled by Switzerland, as in the case of the [Saab-ordered] anti-tank weapons.”5 Words fail the reader! 
• Tiana Moser, parliamentary group leader of the Green Liberals, demands a change of course from the Federal Council because, after all, it is not a question of direct arms exports but of weapons that Switzerland has already sold to “friendly democracies”: “These weapons would be passed on to a country that is defending itself against an aggressor”.6

Some politicians of the “Centre Party”, to which Federal Councillor Viola Amherd also belongs, are particularly eager to gnaw away at the neutral and direct-democratic Swiss model – in the hope of gaining a few voter percentages?

• Centre member of the Council of States Pirmin Bischof, President of the Foreign Affairs Committee of the Council of States: “The Federal Council should now take action and correct its practice.” (SRF News of 1 June 2022)

Without a legal basis? No, by means of emergency law!

• This is what centre party president Gerhard Pfister said: He called the blocking of arms deliveries “indecent” and tweeted already on 24 April: “BR [Federal Council] has in my opinion competence to allow [Germany] to deliver to [Ukraine] if in national interest. (Art. 1 para 2 Embargo Act). The latter seems to me to be given here, if [Switzerland] helps a European democracy to defend itself. BR is responsible for this failure to help [Ukraine].” (https://twitter.com/gerhardpfister/) 

Counter-attack by neutrality-preserving and pacifist Swiss forces

The “Federal Law on War Material” was revised or rather tightened only a few months ago, on 1 October 2021, as an indirect counter-proposal to the popular initiative “Against arms exports to civil war countries”. The Federal Council had included a clause in the draft with which it wanted to give itself the authority to “deviate from the licensing criteria in exceptional circumstances in order to safeguard the country’s foreign or security policy interests.” The Council of States deleted this clause, not only with the votes of the SP (Social Democratic Party) and the Greens, but also, strangely enough, with the large majority of the Centre party as the tipping point. The National Council, which initially wanted to cling to the exceptional regulation, finally gave in to allow the popular initiative to be withdrawn. Result: The exceptional competence that Gerhard Pfister wants to give the Federal Council today was rejected by both Councils on 1 October 2021, which means that the tightened War Material Act was adopted. In the National Council, by the way, with 27 of 30 centre votes, including the vote of Pfister himself.7
  Even if the memory of some centre politicians is apparently very short, there is still hope. For Pfister’s parliamentary group “does not follow its leader unconditionally”, according to the Neue Zürcher Zeitung of 3 June. The Swiss Greens are obviously made of different stuff than their German colleagues: In addition to the SVP (Swiss Popular Party), which has always stood up for the adherence of neutrality, the president of the Green Party, Balthasar Glättli, also warns against a change of direction with regard to arms exports: “The previous practice is broadly supported. The Federal Council must not simply abandon it behind the scenes without consulting parliament.”8 And the Zurich SP National Councillor Min Li Marti stated on 27 April that the supply of war material to warring countries “violates the War Material Act and the law of neutrality”. If, in view of the war in Ukraine, Swiss neutrality is to be called into question, “then this would have to be discussed in principle, it is not a matter of exceptional provisions, but concerns the core of neutrality”.9
  Here the circle closes, because this corresponds analogously to the statement of SVP National Councillor Franz Grüter in an interview with Current Concerns: “The neutrality question goes so deep into the DNA of our country that we have to have the discussion – we have to have it! So much has happened, with the sanctions that have been taken, with the efforts to join NATO or move closer to it, with membership of the UN Security Council. But I think we need to have this discussion when the dust has settled a little, when we can talk about these issues from a certain distance.”10  •

 

 

READ MORE:
https://www.zeit-fragen.ch/en/archives/2022/nr-13-14-juni-2022/neutralitaet-ist-ein-kostbares-gut-hueten-wir-es

 

 

 

 

READ FROM TOP.

 

 

 

 

FREE JULIAN ASSANGE NOW..........

The Swiss federal government has turned down a request to treat wounded Ukrainians, arguing that the move would violate the Alpine nation’s neutral status, the country’s Tages Anzeiger newspaper has learned. The request was made by a NATO department.

The Euro-Atlantic Disaster Response Coordination Centre – a NATO structure that currently coordinates international medical evacuations and treatment of Ukrainians injured during the ongoing conflict between Moscow and Kiev – reportedly reached out to the Swiss Army’s Coordinated Medical Service (KSD) in May. The military bloc sought aid from Swiss medics in caring for not just Ukrainian soldiers but for civilians in need of hospital treatment as well, media reported on Monday.

Switzerland’s national association of health-service providers – the conference of cantonal health directors (GDK) – then said it was “fundamentally open” to the idea of admitting injured Ukrainians to Swiss health facilities. The Federal Health Office signaled its approval as well. In mid-June, the idea, however, was turned down by the Foreign Affairs Department, which said any such admission would be impossible for “legal and practical reasons,” Tages Anzeiger reports.

Under the Geneva Conventions ratified by Bern, a neutral state might treat soldiers taking part in a conflict between third countries but it must then ensure they “can no longer take part in the acts of war,” the Swiss media reported. Otherwise, such a nation would lose its neutral status, media reports explained.

According to the Swiss Blick newspaper, Bern might potentially go as far as to imprison any Ukrainian soldiers it has treated. Another option would be to ask Moscow to allow the recovered soldiers to return to Ukraine, the paper added.

Treatment of civilians turned out to be just as problematic for the Swiss authorities under the existing circumstances, according to the country’s media. Johannes Matyassy, the Director of the Foreign Affairs Department’s Consular Directorate, told journalists that “it is almost impossible to distinguish between civilians and soldiers” when it comes to the modern-day Ukraine since “many civilians in Ukraine have taken up arms.”

According to the Swiss Department of Foreign Affairs, Bern “did not just say no” but offered to provide some help “on the ground” instead. Switzerland plans to send humanitarian aid to support civilian hospitals in Ukraine, Swiss media report, adding that the exact scale of this aid is still being discussed.

Switzerland – a nation that prides itself on its neutrality – has still joined some of the western sanctions against Russia over its military operation in Ukraine. Bern nonetheless repeatedly prevented other western nations from sending Swiss-made arms and ammo to Kiev. In April, Switzerland blocked delivery of ammunition used by Germany’s Marder infantry fighting vehicles to Ukraine, according to local media.

In early June, it also turned down a Danish request to re-export Swiss-made armored vehicles to Kiev. Bern also said that nations like Germany or Italy could send arms with Swiss-made components to Ukraine, but only if the proportion of Swiss-made elements in them is below 50%.

 

READ MORE:

https://www.rt.com/news/559198-switzerland-refuse-nato-request-ukrainian/

 

READ FROM TOP.

 

FREE JULIAN ASSANGE NOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

Who has got us into this energy mess?by Dr. iur. Marianne Wüthrich

 

 

Anyone who tuned in to Swiss radio news or the SRF daytime news on the evening of 29 June was nose-dived into the harsh laws of reality: There was talk of a gas and electricity shortage that could arrive in Switzerland as early as next winter, and a corresponding federal emergency plan was presented. The Federal Council had invited the public to a media conference1 in the afternoon, at which DETEC head Simonetta Sommaruga and EAER head Guy Parmelin informed the public about the latest state of affairs and their view of things.2 In this context, we have to disentangle what the facts are, who caused them and to what extent they have something to do with the Ukraine war, as was claimed on various occasions at the conference and in the media.
 

On 21 May 2017, 58 % of the electorate voted “yes” to the “Energy Strategy 2050”. In the voting booklet, the Federal Council had advertised for a “yes” vote with the most beautiful of shouts: “With the first package of the Energy Strategy 2050, Switzerland can reduce energy consumption, reduce dependence on imported fossil energies and strengthen domestic renewable energies. This means that investments remain in Switzerland and do not flow abroad. The proposal ensures a secure and clean energy supply. It also leads to a gradual phase-out of nuclear energy.” Who would want to say “no” to such an enticing prospect for the future? Today, five years later, we have to admit: None of this has come to pass. 

Reduce energy consumption? 

Recently we could read in the daily press: “Switzerland will need much more electricity in the next thirty years than was assumed in the Energy Strategy 2050”. (“Neue Zürcher Zeitung” of 31 May 2022) It is indeed good for the environment that more and more people are switching to electric cars – but that means more electricity demand instead of petrol. Moreover, the continuing increase in immigration to our densely populated country cancels out any savings: More people need more energy. It had been known long before 24 February 2022 that it would soon no longer be possible to meet Switzerland’s growing energy needs. The Ukraine crisis has come at just the right time for some people to divert attention from the inaccurate claims made before the 2017 referendum.

“Global energy crisis”:
Are the Russians to blame?

Federal Councillor Sommaruga said in an interview after the media conference: “We have a war in Europe. We see that Russia has now partly curbed gas exports. This means that the whole of Europe is in an energy crisis. Switzerland is not an island; we are part of it. [...] In recent weeks, the situation has worsened. Because Russia has now also partly tightened the screw again on Germany – and that is a very important country for Swiss gas supplies.”3 
    For heaven’s sake, who has got us into this mess? Putin did not invent the unspeakable sanctions. We Europeans, Switzerland included, walked right into them instead of refusing to obey the command from Washington. The Russians, for their part, have always supplied us with as much oil and gas as we ordered and paid for, even during the Cold War. But after we have bullied and marginalised Russia and its citizens (not only billionaires!) to the hilt and put its world cultural possessions on the index – who is surprised that the Russians are looking for other customers? 

Gas supply security:
Active engagement of the gas industry and North-South transit

About 15 % of Switzerland’s energy needs are covered by natural gas. Switzerland imports 43 % of its gas from Russia, 22 % from Norway and 19 % from the EU, the rest from other countries (gazenergie.ch). According to the Federal Council’s media release of 29 June 2022: “Switzerland has no gas storage facilities of its own and is therefore completely dependent on imports. Up to three quarters of gas deliveries to Switzerland are made via Germany. Switzerland would therefore also be affected by gas shortages in the EU and especially in Germany. If the storage facilities cannot be filled according to plans, a shortage cannot be ruled out in the coming winter.”4 
    What is the Federal Council doing about a possible gas shortage? So far it has prompted the gas industry to set up a “Winter Supply Task Force 2022/2023”. This task force presented its concept for the creation of a winter gas reserve to the Federal Council on 29 June. This includes, among other things, “the establishment of a physical gas reserve in gas storage facilities in neighbouring countries. This should cover 15 % (around 6 TWh) of Switzerland’s annual gas consumption of around 35 TWh.” (Federal Council media release of 29 June 2022) Here you can also read that we actually consume much more gas in winter, namely 30 TWh, and only 5 TWh in summer!
    Switzerland may not have its own fossil fuels, but its location as a hub in Europe also brings advantages: The north-south transit across the Alps not only gives us air-polluting queues of cars and lorries, but is also of great importance for the flow of electricity and gas from our neighbours. The transit gas pipeline brings gas from Germany to Wallbach in Aargau and from France to Rodersdorf in Solothurn, where it is distributed through the national transport pipelines. Some of it flows from the Valais to Italy, but gas can also flow in the opposite direction from the south to Germany, for example from North Africa. Around 90 % of the volume that flows through the transit gas pipeline is destined for transit, and around 10 % for Switzerland. With the transit gas pipeline, Switzerland therefore has a pawn in its hand for bad times, according to the “Tages-Anzeiger” of 3 July 2022.5
    One would think that in good times the Federal Council would have used this pawn and made provisions. It is surprising how hesitant the executive remains in today’s uncertain situation.

Gas supply: two urgent
duties of the Federal Council

Firstly, supply agreements with neighbouring countries. The association of the Swiss gas industry VSG says: “The critical point remains that the procured gas actually reaches Switzerland. It is imperative that the Federal Council continue its efforts to obtain corresponding commitments from neighbouring countries.”6
    And if our neighbouring countries themselves run out of gas – will they continue to supply us? “There is no guarantee of that,” said Simonetta Sommaruga at the media conference on 29 June. That is why written agreements – so-called “solidarity agreements” – are all the more urgent. There is an international treaty with France, but there are always serious power shortages because nuclear reactors are shut down for safety reasons. In view of the fact that, according to Federal Councillor Guy Parmelin, ElCom President Werner Luginbühl and other energy experts at the media conference, a gas and/or electricity shortage could occur as early as next winter, the Federal Council is taking a surprisingly relaxed approach to the matter. According to its media release of 29 June, talks with Germany are “ongoing”. At the WEF in May, Sommaruga and Parmelin “agreed with the German Minister of Economics, Robert Habeck, to conclude an agreement to this effect”. A first round of negotiations had taken place in June 2022. At this snail’s pace, will there be enough time until autumn?
    Secondly, did you know that Switzerland has no gas storage facilities at home? Reserves abroad – even if we have already paid for them! – are a highly unreliable facility in a general shortage, as we learned in the Corona crisis. This is why the Federal Council must finally provide for gas storage facilities at home, according to the Swiss Gas Association: “The VSG also welcomes the fact that the Federal Government wants to support efforts to build gas storage capacities in Switzerland. Corresponding projects have so far failed due to economic viability and a lack of support from the authorities.” (VSG media release of 29 June 2022) However, Federal Councillor Sommaruga does not distinguish herself with any particular determination or haste on this point either: Her department, together with the Department of Economic Affairs, is “examining [...] how the development of gas storage capacities in Switzerland can be promoted and will inform the Federal Council of the status of the examination work by the end of August 2022” (Federal Council media release of 29 June 2022). It will probably be several winters before the groundbreaking ceremony.

Security of electricity supply:
Promote hydropower instead of putting the brakes on it

The fact that the expansion of renewable energies in Switzerland is making only very slow progress has nothing to do with the war in Ukraine. Current Concerns has repeatedly pointed out that, in addition to the “new renewables”, Switzerland’s strongest energy source, hydropower, could supply much more electricity in the future than it does today if all political forces wanted it.7
    Federal Councillor Sommaruga in the media conference: “The 15 new reservoir projects that were planned two years ago in cooperation with associations have as their goal a secure supply of electricity for Switzerland.” Now everyone must work together: ElCom, cantons, parties and the Federal Council.8 
    In fact, the main obstacle is the rampant objections to any increase in the height of a dam – even from environmental protection associations, which agreed to the 15 projects mentioned at the meeting with Ms Sommaruga! Now that an electricity shortage could be approaching, according to a survey 67% of respondents are “in favour of significant cuts in environmental protection in order to increase the production of renewable energy”. 65 % are in favour of building reservoirs in areas where there used to be glaciers. 70 % want a streamlining of the right of appeal in order to accelerate the expansion.9 In this sense, Federal Councillor Sommaruga has for some time been proposing a single appeal procedure per construction project, instead of each association being able to separately take its objection to each individual construction stage all the way to the Federal Supreme Court, which sometimes leads to delays lasting decades (!). This is where parliament and the electorate need to drive a stake in the ground.

What can we citizens contribute to the prosperous
development of our country?

On a positive note, the lack of an electricity agreement between Switzerland and Brussels was not mentioned once at the media conference or in the numerous announcements made in connection with it. Apparently, it was clear to everyone: when it comes to the sausage, or rather the “sprit” (petrol), the neighbouring countries solve their mutual problems bilaterally, as they have done since time immemorial.
    At the media conference, Federal Councillor Guy Parmelin promoted energy saving: It is becoming increasingly likely that there will be a bottleneck in winter. Because several French nuclear power plants are currently shut down, a shortage of electricity cannot be ruled out. Although we have enough energy today, the Federal Council wants to sensitise the population. For example, “empty gymnasiums [...] should not be heated”. If the appeals for savings were not enough, a quota system for the gas supply (for large consumers) would have to be considered. During the question-and-answer session with the media representatives, some unintentionally funny statements were made: “Do we have to lower the thermostat or is that just a recommendation?” a journalist wanted to know. It is a recommendation, Parmelin replied, adding: He does not have a gas heating system himself, but it would certainly not be wrong to save there and reduce the temperature a bit.
    By the way, the Federal Government’s emergency plan is pretty steep! The last stage after the quotas for large consumers (including, for example, the SBB or the Post Office) is cyclical power cuts (8 hours on and 4 hours off, or 4 – 4 – 4).10 That would really shake up Switzerland as a business location, including us workers and consumers. It would be much wiser if the Federal Government did its domestic and foreign policy homework – if possible, before we are faced with a shortage.
    Conclusion: As far as sensible ways to save energy are concerned, we still have many “empty gyms” in our resource-wasting society where we can save energy before we have to freeze in our homes. But for a prosperous future of our country – and the other European peoples – it is also important that we citizens speak out against the brutal destruction of relations with Russia and its citizens by our governments. Not just so that we can get oil and gas again! We leave the closing words to Maria Zakharova, spokesperson for the Russian Foreign Ministry: “We note with regret that Switzerland’s neutral status is beginning to show cracks and that this development is continuing. [...] Regrettably, Bern’s current assessments and approaches to settling the conflict in Ukraine cannot in any way be described as neutral or well-considered. Of course, this aspect will play a role in the dialogue with Bern, both in terms of the bilateral and international agenda for Russia.”11 A reminder to us Swiss! •

 

READ MORE:

https://www.zeit-fragen.ch/en/archives/2022/nr-14-28-juni-2022-1/wer-hat-uns-die-energie-misere-eingebrockt

 

 

READ FROM TOP.

 

Who has got us into this energy mess?... THE USA — NO MORE NO LESS....

 

 

 

REE JULIAN ASSANGE NOW.......................