Now ex-defense minister Arnold Koller (91) speaks

Arnold Koller was the first CVP defense minister in Switzerland’s history (from 1987). He sees parallels between the then Soviet Union and today’s Russia and has clear ideas about which priorities the new Federal Council should set.

Arnold Koller wrote history as the first CVP defense minister of Switzerland (from 1987). Before that, the FDP and SVP magistrates had always headed the military department. The army abyss (GSOA) fell in Koller’s era. At the age of 91, the Appenzeller is well informed about the security policy topicality and the construction sites in the VBS defense department. Koller kept his Schalk, at the end of the conversation he says: « So, that was probably my last interview now! »

They led the military department in the final phase of the Cold War. How does today’s army differ from that at that time?

Arnold Koller: Since then there have been colossal changes in the threat situation and also with the army itself. At that time there was nothing about cyber and drone war. The most obvious is the difference in the stocks. When I took my office in 1987, the army included 650,000 men. Today we are still around 120,000.

After the collapse of the Soviet Union, the enemy disappeared into the east. 35 years later, Russia has become a threat again.

This is an interesting parallel. The decisive difference is: During the Cold War, the situation was extremely stable. Apart from the last few years of the Cold War, geopolitical consistency. Today we experience the opposite: instability and unpredictability. Who would have thought that war would be waged again in Europe, as in Ukraine since 2022? Who would have thought that a US president was doing this such a change of position and published any new directive almost every day? This is very demanding for a militia army that Switzerland has.

Because a militia army is a carrier than a professional army?

Changes in a militia army need more time. In a phase of constantly changing threats – from cyber risks to geopolitical faults – it is less agile. Perhaps this fact has been underestimated in recent years. Until the outbreak of war in Ukraine, in Switzerland, they were expected to have warning times that were unrealistically long: weeks or even months. It can start very quickly, even with territorial upes. This was shown by Putin’s attack on Ukraine.

Military experts say that the army is only partially defensive in an emergency. Does Switzerland have to discuss a professional army?

The militia army has the invaluable advantage that it is strongly anchored in the people. This is central in a small state. A poorly anchored professional army would be a great risk.

The “Group for a Switzerland without an army” campaign fell during her term in office, which won almost 36 percent in 1989. That was a shock. How do you perceive the acceptance of the army today?

At that time the army began to criticize and even question. We reacted and reforms, for example, the army also took over the tasks of peace promotion. The Ukraine War has now led to a new awareness of security risks. Today hardly anyone thinks that the army is superfluous. This should actually make adjustments of the army easier to the new threat situation.

Do you agree with Viola Amherd: Do you need more cooperation with NATO?

Yes, that also corresponds to my opinion. We can deepen the cooperation with NATO without endangering neutrality. My experience shows that the Swiss people are open to changes in the military. During my time we sent medical units to Namibia for the first time and sent to Finland. The citizens have only trouble with institutional connections, not with pragmatic cooperation.

The VBS department, formerly EMD, was often unpopular among federal councils. For Adolf Ogi it was « Nati B ». They also moved to the judicial department after a good two years.

Yes, but because it came to the abrupt resignation of Elisabeth Kopp. Otherwise I would have stayed in the defense department longer. It is important for the defense department that a Federal Council remains for a long time. Only then does he have the necessary influence to enforce changes.