Albert Rösti recently commented on the US election campaign at a panel event at a school in Basel. “I lean more towards Trump,” the Federal Councilor replied to a student’s question about his personal preference.
The magistrate thereby broke an unwritten law according to which federal councilors do not comment on foreign elections.
Later Rösti came back. Rösti told the “NZZ” and the French-speaking Swiss television RTS that during his appearance he spoke as a private person and not as a Federal Councilor.
Expert: Albert Rösti missed a communicative exit
It is clear to Mark Balsiger that Rösti made a faux pas with his statements: “It has never helped when federal councilors comment on elections abroad,” said the political analyst. Every Federal Council member has the right to his or her private opinion. But there is no question that Rösti spoke in Basel in his capacity as a member of the state government.
According to Balsiger, Viola Amherd recently did better when she cleverly avoided the sensitive question about her preferred election outcome in the USA in an interview with SRF. “We will work with the democratically elected person – and represent the interests of our country,” Amherd explained at the time.
In the days after the performance in Basel, Rösti also missed an opportunity, says Balsiger. With active communication, he could have nipped the debate about his statements in the bud: “Every Federal Councilor spends a lot of effort on Instagram. With a 30-second video the whole thing would have been over.”
Federal Council members and their opinions – a difficult combination
However, sensitive expressions of opinion by Federal Council members also existed before the age of Instagram.
In 2006, Justice Minister Christoph Blocher said during a state visit to Turkey that the racism criminal law introduced ten years earlier was giving him “stomach pain”. The statement sparked criticism in Switzerland – where two Turkish nationals were under investigation for denying the Armenian genocide. The state government then felt compelled to reprimand its own member Blocher.
Christoph Blocher during his visit to Ankara in October 2006: For critics, Blocher had caved in with his statements to the Erdogan government.
KEYSTONE/Yoshiko Kusano
And in the recent past, magistrates have occasionally put themselves in communication nettles with their statements. A year after the Russian invasion of Ukraine, Alain Berset spoke of a “war frenzy” into which the West had fallen. Criticism of his comments continued for days.
A year earlier, Ueli Maurer said at his last media conference that he didn’t care whether a man or a woman succeeded him in the Federal Council – as long as it wasn’t an “it”. Transgender organizations then demanded an apology from the outgoing SVP magistrate – but this did not materialize.
Former Federal Council spokesman: “Trump will be happy”
Former Federal Council spokesman Oswald Sigg does not see the affair surrounding Trump’s statements as a scandal. About the SVP politician Rösti, Sigg says: “It also shows a certain straightforwardness that he said it like that (directly, editor’s note) and didn’t make any excuses.”
Rösti said in Basel that he sees more opportunities for peace in a second Trump presidency. But he also admitted that the candidate’s personality was problematic.
KEYSTONE/Alessandro della Valle
It remains to be seen whether Rösti will suffer long-term damage from this episode. The only thing that is clear to Oswald Sigg is: “Only one person will be really happy: Donald Trump.”
