There are silences that protect. And there are silences that betray.
In the Jacques Baud, the silence of the Federal Department of Foreign Affairs is deafening. While foreign institutions stigmatise a Swiss citizen without judgement, a public platform, SWI swissinfo.ch, funded by the SSR SRG, The French press, for its part, obediently relays the political wording of a European decision - with no contradiction, no critical spirit, no journalistic rigour.
The process is now well established. As recently at the RTS, In this case, the arguments of a foreign authority are repeated word for word, a militant «expert» is summoned to testify on behalf of the prosecution, and an administrative sanction is transformed into a moral verdict. All paid for with Swiss taxpayers' money.
Where is the Confederation?
In a normal country, when a national is taken hostage - albeit legally - by a foreign power, the diplomatic apparatus springs into action. Task forces are set up, communication is ensured and procedures are clear. But here, nothing. Because the hostage-takers wear ties and sit in Brussels, inaction becomes the rule. L’European Union sanctions, stigmatises and freezes rights. And Berne looks the other way.
The argument put forward - alleged «propaganda» - does not stand up to scrutiny. Since when is the expression of dissenting analysis a «crime» without trial? Since when does the use of controversial terms justify extraterritorial sanctions? Montesquieu reminded us that «freedom is the right to do whatever the law permits».». But in this case, there is no Swiss law being violated, nor any judicial decision. Only a foreign political decision, taken as if it were a revealed truth.
The most serious problem lies elsewhere.
Le State Secretariat for Economic Affairs acknowledges that Switzerland is not adopting this sanctions regime. That's all very well. But why this diplomatic silence? There are two possible explanations: either steps have been taken and are being concealed - which poses a major democratic problem - or there are no steps being taken. In the latter case, Switzerland would be abandoning one of its citizens to an arbitrary measure, creating a formidable precedent.
Hannah Arendt wrote that «propaganda becomes dangerous when it replaces thought».». This is exactly what happens when the public media stop providing information and instead relay official narratives, and when the state gives up protecting its citizens for fear of offending.
Conclusion - Neutrality cannot be proclaimed, it must be defended
The scandal is not just European. It is Swiss. It lies in this double renunciation: public journalism transformed into an echo chamber, and diplomacy that remains silent when it should be speaking out. Today, Jacques Baud. Tomorrow, who?
A Confederation that no longer dares to defend its own has already begun to lose its sovereignty.
We analyse what the media keep quiet. What Berne negotiates, we dissect. Join our HQ on Telegram now: https://t.me/swisssovereignty