2014年-CEPS欧洲政策研究中心_The_end_of_chocolate_box_4页_419kb

The End of Chocolate Box-Style Integration? EU-Swiss Relations After the Referendum

Core Content

This commentary by Adam Łazowski discusses the implications of Switzerland's 2014 referendum on EU-Swiss relations, particularly focusing on the potential end of the "chocolate box" model of integration. The referendum, which rejected the expansion of the free movement of persons agreement to include Croatian citizens, has triggered a re-evaluation of the bilateral relationship between the EU and Switzerland. The document highlights the need for a more coherent and enforceable framework to address the growing legal and political tensions.

Main Points

Historical Context

• Switzerland's Reluctance to Integrate: Switzerland has historically been hesitant about European integration, resisting full membership in the EU and the European Economic Area (EEA).
• EU Enlargement and Integration: Despite its reluctance, Switzerland was forced to integrate gradually due to its geographical proximity and economic interests.
• Bilateral Agreements: Over 100 bilateral agreements have been established between the EU and Switzerland, covering a wide range of sectors including trade, transport, and legal cooperation.

The Bilateral Framework

• Bilateral I and II Packages:
  • Bilateral I includes agreements on free movement of persons, air transport, rail and road transport, trade in agricultural products, and mutual recognition of standards.
  • Bilateral II covers Schengen, asylum, taxation, anti-fraud, and participation in EU programs.
• Guillotine Clauses:
  • The Bilateral I package is bound by a guillotine clause, meaning all agreements must be either accepted or rejected together.
  • The Schengen and asylum agreements also have specific guillotine clauses, creating a link between free movement and Schengen participation.

Legal and Political Challenges

• Fragmentation and Inconsistency: The current system lacks a unified institutional structure, with numerous committees managing different agreements, leading to inefficiencies and legal uncertainty.
• Enforcement Issues: Switzerland's lack of obligation to follow changes in EU law has caused legal fragmentation and undermined the effectiveness of EU law.
• Referendum Impact: The rejection of the extension of the free movement agreement to Croatia has led to the suspension of ratification processes and highlighted the fragility of the current model.

Systemic Problems

• Breaches of Agreements: The reintroduction of quotas for Central and Eastern European citizens has been seen as a breach of the Free Movement of Persons Agreement.
• Need for Reform: The EU has called for a more integrated and enforceable legal framework, including horizontal issues such as dynamic adaptation, homogeneous interpretation, and independent enforcement mechanisms.

Options for the Future

• Short-Term Response: The EU should clarify its stance on Switzerland's breaches and consider terminating the Bilateral I package if necessary.
• Medium-Term Strategy: The EU may seek to renegotiate the bilateral relationship, possibly drawing inspiration from Association Agreements with Moldova and Georgia, or adopting a model based on the European Economic Area.
• Swiss Position: The Swiss authorities face a difficult political decision to implement the referendum results, which may have significant consequences for their integration with the EU.

Key Information

• Referendum Date: February 9, 2014.
• Impact on Agreements: The referendum has led to the suspension of ratification processes and the potential termination of the Bilateral I package.
• Guillotine Clause: A key feature of the Bilateral I package, which may now be triggered if Switzerland reintroduces quotas for all EU citizens.
• EU's Position: The EU has limited flexibility in response to Switzerland's actions and needs to send a clear message to both Switzerland and the UK.
• Swiss Challenges: The Swiss government must reconcile the referendum outcome with existing legal obligations, potentially leading to a rethinking of its integration strategy.

Conclusion

The referendum has brought to light the inherent weaknesses in the current EU-Swiss bilateral model. The time is ripe for a comprehensive and coherent framework that addresses legal homogeneity, enforcement, and institutional structure. A frank discussion about free movement of persons remains essential, as it is a cornerstone of the existing relationship. The EU is in a strong position to push for reform, and the Swiss must navigate the political and legal implications of their decision.