Item — HN Reader

The EU will not change those treaties, because it has no real reason to.

And especially now: How do you refuse something to David Cameron's UK (a big member state), but hand it to Switzerland (a small non-member state)?

In the case of the UK, it would demolish the very core idea and foundation of the EU. This UK parallel makes it very, very unlikely that the EU would give anything to Switzerland that could even only hint at flexibility in this matter.

The "best" outcome Switzerland can hope for (unless they repeal that immigration reform) is a state where Switzerland is in breach of the treaties, but the EU looks the other way, either on purpose, or because the member states cannot agree on a way to handle the situation. This couldn't last forever, though.

And by the way: Trying to have a treaty re-negotiated has already worked out not so very well for Switzerland in the case of Zurich airport. ;-)

Although I have to admit, we Germans basically did the same thing to Switzerland in the case of the CDs with tax data. It is a shitty thing to do.

2 comments

Heh, true, if the Swiss were to be allowed a renegotiation, all the arguments about how the UK either wouldn't be allowed to do the same, or wouldn't be allowed to leave the EU, change it's laws and occupy a common market position like Switzerland ... well they'd all look like lies!

The next few years are going to be interesting for the EU. The Brits are looking at trying to stop total free movement (or at least end social protections for those that do), the Germans have actually been looking at something similar (restrictions on access to Social Security). The UK is also currently in the grip of some sort of polarisation of politics with the right wing making gains in unexpected places (UKIP), and a serious public dialog about leaving the EU entirely. France is in the grips of a major swing to the right (The Front National would probably win a presidential election if one were held now)...

Interesting times.

And by the way, Switzerland is not part of the EU (they're part of the Schengen agreement, part of the EFTA and have some agreements with the EU)

What about "non-member state" seemed unclear to you?

Nothing, but discussing "How do you refuse something to David Cameron's UK (a big member state), but hand it to (a non member state)" is kind of obvious no?

One is a member, the other one is not.

It's obvious that it wouldn't work.

The EU cannot tell Britain that free movement of people is essential enough to see them leave the Union, but then hand it to Switzerland, just because they ask nicely.

Those bilaterals with Switzerland are not some totally unrelated treaties, they are more like "EU membership light".

Yes, the EU needs the UK and Switzerland, and they both don't want to commit fully to it in one way or another (like the UK not using the Euro - good for them btw)

True, they can't let CH slip on that, at the same time, they'll probably do come with a compromise (or look the other way in some aspects)

We kind of need Britain, although not absolutely.

Switzerland? You're joking, right? Nobody wants to hurt Switzerland, or give them a hard time, but if they turn away, the reaction will mostly be a shrug.