Marcel Dettling in an interview on his year and Trump

In a few days, your choice marks the SVP president. Are you satisfied so far?

It would not be good if you were completely satisfied in politics. There are always construction sites.

But?

We are well positioned politically. In many important dossiers, such as exuberant immigration, asylum chaos or neutrality, we are present with popular initiatives.

What was particularly successful, what less?

The elections in many cantons are certainly successful. Since Sunday we have also been the strongest force in the canton of Solothurn. This also helps for motivation. After Toni Brunner it was said that it could no longer go up. Now we are even stronger. In the canton of Schwyz we even have over 38 percent.

What is your goal for the future?

Furthermore, freedom politics make people in the country. We have potential especially in cities and in western Switzerland.

Nationally, they also benefit from a legal slip among the population. Will she be happy?

Let's put it this way: It has certainly gotten better in parliament, but on crucial questions it is still a game of dice with the FDP and the middle. We are often alone, even though we have a majority together.

Nevertheless, the change of direction is also noticeable in Switzerland.

Yes, but that has more to do with the fact that we are never written down as left as in other countries. As a SVP, we, I can say, always had a strong, warning voice.

Are these more conciliatory tones that you now agree with as president?

No, counter question: Why did the AfD become so strong in Germany?

Your thesis?

Because burning topics such as asylum or migration were not taken by the other parties.

That also has to do with the history of Germany. This is tricky.

It may be, but the migration problems in Austria, France, Sweden and so on are just as much an issue.

What does that mean for you?

That asylum abuse, immigration and asylum crime are important topics. They employ people. You shouldn't leave these topics left, otherwise the hammer will come back twice.

You also found an issue in the VBS. Are you happy that Viola Amherd resigned so quickly, shortly after your request?

I am scared myself that things went so quickly. Apparently she noticed herself that she was not up to this task. In addition, there were the many misconceptions: Walliser Filz, women's promotion at all costs or the idea that the army must be diverse. Ms. Amherd absolutely set the wrong priorities.

Now they want Markus Ritter as a Federal Council. He is SVP-close and a farmer.

No matter which of the candidates, the current situation is an opportunity that the VBS will be managed better again and thus the army.

You are farmers and SVP politicians. Do you choose Farmer President Ritter or the Zug government councilor Martin Pfister?

That with the three or even five farmers who are to be in the Federal Council in the future, if Ritter is elected, is primarily a topic of the media. For me, the ability of the candidates play the leading role.

And will the brick knight against the professional officers prevail?

We'll see that. Above all, our hearing has shown that Pfister was very vague in many topics.

Example?

For example in the nuclear power question. Then Pfister said he asked. The construction of new nuclear power plants is unrealistic. But he was against technology bans.

Yes and?

In the end it was not clear whether we need nuclear power plants or not.

Before the US election, they explained that Trump had been driven well. Do you stay with it?

We said we drove better with the Republican administration than with the democratic. The Obama government has tried to destroy our banking square.

There has been no stone on the other in the world order since January. Trump turns everything upside down.

I am surprised that everyone is so surprised. He does what he announced in the election campaign. The pace is certainly enormous. But Switzerland should keep a cool head.

What kind of consequences for Switzerland does that have? Does the SVP now change its strategy, for example to the EU or Europe?

The situation today shows how important it is that Switzerland is neutral and that remains. Now Europe absolutely wants to invest in the armor, although you don't even know where the material could be procured. The United States remains the biggest war power and they have the best weapons.

How should Switzerland ensure its security, who should be sought to be sought?

Switzerland must remain neutral. That is our strength. We must not let ourselves be brought into foreign conflicts, and we certainly don't have to interfere with the interests of other countries. For me it is clear: we have to go back to the everlasting, armed neutrality. We have already missed that. We no longer play a role since the Bürgenstock disaster.

What many confuses in Switzerland is that the SVP stands more and more behind Putin and thus behind its autocratic regime.

I'm sorry, what? Such a nonsense. If Switzerland wants to take on a broker role, we must not take part. You have to talk to all parties to the conflict. Peace negotiations are now taking place in Saudi Arabia. That is shameful for Switzerland.

The SVP took itself against the measures taken across Europe against Russia.

That's not true. But we cannot simply take over the EU sanction machine.

Again. Which security policy, which strategy, should Switzerland tackle?

Now the back and last must have become clear that we have to defend Switzerland ourselves. Trump is now in focus. But who knows what it will look like with the EU in ten years. What if « the (s) of the new woman from the Leyen » (President of the European Commission, editor's note) has a similar character as Donald Trump?

That means?

We have to go back to an independent, defensive army.

What should that be allowed to cost, we will ever be able to defend ourselves all by ourselves?

I'm not talking about we can fight on the battlefield for ten years. It is about upgrading and investing in security for the Swiss population. Today we are now throwing billions for asylum seekers and development aid.

What should the army look like?

In the long term, talk must also be talked about. 100,000 army members are certainly not sufficient in today's security situation. For comparison: France used 85,000 security guards just to secure the Olympic Games.

Wouldn't it make more sense if Switzerland would cooperate and approach a European security network that has now been created?

There is no functioning European security network. The EU doubts NATO.

Isn't it the United States who want NATO?

The United States says that Europe should agree and take money in hand to enable its own security. They say: «You have rely on us for 70 years and invested your money in Woke, gender or development aid and asylum. It is time for you to take the defense into your own hands. » Trump holds the mirror to us. He pulled Europe down in Europe in a very short time.

Putin could be motivated to attack other Eastern European or Baltic states if he gets right from the United States' peace plan and could keep the Crimea and large parts of Ukraine.

Putin doesn't get right. Peace has its price for everyone involved. You have to be realistic. Ukraine cannot win the war. Russia has nuclear weapons. Do you want a third World War?

So you support Trump's idea of ​​peace?

There must be negotiations on peace as quickly as possible so that not more people die senselessly. If the Europeans can do that, I am so right for me. But after the appearance of Selenski in the Oval Office I doubt.

Selenski was the « evil », not Trump or his vice?

You have to keep that in mind. Selenski is at the center of the power of the country that has supported him and his country most for years. Then you can't act like that. Selenski does not seem to be ready for peace yet, even though he is going out the soldiers. Actually, the Europeans would have to step in, which so far led so big words. They should bring their children to the war front to Ukraine to fight. Are you ready for this? I do not think so.