-
Screenshot youtube
![Clear case: fighter jet manufacturers would fall under the investment ban. It is not quite so clear in the case of goods that have both a military and a civil use.]()
—
1/11
Clear case: fighter jet manufacturers would fall under the investment ban. It is not quite so clear in the case of goods that have both a military and a civil use.
—-
Screenshot youtube
![For example nuts. The War Material Act clearly states that goods that have both a military and a civil use are not considered war material.]()
—
2/11
For example nuts. The War Material Act clearly states that goods that have both a military and a civil use are not considered war material.
—-
Zvg
![]()
—
3/11
GSoA secretary Nadia Kuhn: “In our view, the passage is intolerable.” With the video, the federal government is assuming that Swiss SMEs are affected by the initiative.
—-
shutterstock
![According to the Stockholm Peace Research Institute (Sipri), weapons made up almost a third of American Boeing sales in 2018.]()
—
10/11
According to the Stockholm Peace Research Institute (Sipri), weapons made up almost a third of American Boeing sales in 2018.
—-
keystone-sda.ch
![The Federal Council has spoken out against the initiative. Economy Minister Guy Parmelin explains why.]()
—
11/11
The Federal Council has spoken out against the initiative. Economy Minister Guy Parmelin explains why.
—-
—-
Basically, every voting battle is also a struggle for the interpretation of the bill. How does an initiative work if it is accepted by the people? Who would be most affected? And, particularly popular question: What does it cost us?
–
For the opponents, it is part of the political game to inflate the negative consequences of referendums, just as it is important for the proponents to downplay unpleasant consequences.
–
The situation is different with information from the federal government, which prohibits any partisanship. This failed in the official voting video for the initiative “for a ban on war material producers”.
–
No money from AHV, PK or National Bank
After a yes on November 29, the National Bank, as well as the AHV and pension funds, would be prohibited from investing in the manufacture of war material. For example, anyone building rockets or bombs anywhere in the world should not receive any money from Swiss pension schemes, be it in the form of a loan or in the form of shares.
–
The voting video explains these consequences using the example of a fictitious screw manufacturer. In the clip, nicely drawn nuts slide down the assembly line – sometimes with a metallic sheen, sometimes in military colors, but always the same products. According to the illustration, the likeable Swiss screw manufacturer would be affected by the financing ban.
–
But that is exactly where the problem lies: The War Material Act clearly regulates that goods that have both a military and a civil use are not considered war material. For example a screw that could be installed in both a car and a tank. The screw manufacturer from the film is off the hook – but the voting video claims the opposite. Much to the annoyance of the initiators.
–
“Federal Chancellery repeats disinformation”
“The passage of the video is intolerable from our point of view,” says Nadia Kuhn (23), secretary of the group for a Switzerland without an army (GSoA) and co-campaign manager of the war deals initiative. With the video, the federal government is assuming that Swiss SMEs are affected by the initiative. “With this, of all things, the Federal Chancellery is repeating the disinformation of the opponents of the initiative one-to-one,” says Kuhn. In fact, the no-camp tries to draw the circle of those who might suffer. Kuhn: “The evocation of a danger for ordinary Swiss SMEs is perceived by the electorate. Especially if it comes from a position that is actually obliged to be neutral. “
–
That is why the alliance behind the initiative is demanding that the Federal Chancellery delete the passage – or at least expressly point out that the example chosen was wrong. On request, the Federal Chancellery contradicts: The criticized sequence is correct and exemplifies which companies could be affected by the initiative. “The camouflage makes it very clear: this is a military product!” Incidentally, the video does not say at any point that SMEs would be particularly hard hit by the initiative.
–
Legally, however, it is clear: Even a screw in uniform is and remains a screw.
–
That is what the War Business Initiative is all about![]()
Keystone
–
The initiative demands that the national bank or pension funds should no longer be allowed to invest in producers of war material.
–
The Swiss National Bank, foundations and pension funds (AHV / IV / EO) should no longer be allowed to invest in war business. This is what the initiative “For a ban on the financing of war material producers” of the Group for a Switzerland without an Army (GSoA) and the Young Greens demands. They are supported by the Greens, SP, EPP and around 30 organizations.
War material producers are therefore companies that generate more than 5 percent of their annual turnover with the manufacture of war material. Loans, loans, gifts or the purchase of shares would be prohibited. Existing financing would have to be disposed of within four years.
For those in favor, the initiative is a step towards a more peaceful world. Investing in wars and conflicts contradicts the humanitarian tradition of neutral Switzerland. Many financial companies are already making ethical investments today.
The Federal Council and the bourgeois majority in parliament reject the initiative. For them, this would have negative economic consequences for the National Bank, foundations and pension funds. The financial sector as well as the machine, electrical and metal industries could also be affected. The Swiss location would become less attractive.
—-
Published: November 15, 2020, 55 minutes ago–
—
—
—
—
—
