They Didn't Attack Switzerland
by Bill Walker
Switzerland has not been in a war of any kind since 1815. It has not been in an official foreign war since 1515. This would be astounding, even miraculous, for any nation. But Switzerland borders Germany . And France . And Italy . And Austria . And Liechtenstein . Now the Prince of Liechtenstein has rarely lashed out in Blitzkrieg in a desperate bid to reign uber alles, but ALL of Switzerland 's other neighbors have devoted a lot of effort to invading other countries.
In addition to the encircling foreign marauders, Switzerland itself is composed of several different ethnic groups that get along as well as, e.g., Germans and French. But they haven’t ethnically cleansed each other for two centuries, either.
You would think that peacekeeping performance of this kind would make Switzerland an object of study in every political science and civics course worldwide. "WHY Didn't They Attack Switzerland ?" should be the title of many a textbook. This is not the case. Very few political scientists study Switzerland .
Switzerland is of no interest to politicians, because the features of the Swiss system that keep the peace are the same features that make Swiss politicians unimportant. Do you know the name of the Swiss President now serving out his nonrenewable one-year term? No, you do not (it’s Samuel Schmid, but you won’t remember tomorrow). His name doesn't matter, and he doesn't matter to the defense of Switzerland . There is no central location of Swiss defense, no Pentagon or NORAD into which you can crash a 757 or a black-market Kazakh nuclear weapon. The defense of Switzerland is the entire people of Switzerland itself.
The features of the Swiss system for keeping the peace are simple. They mind their own business, and they have very strict gun control. By which they mean that every Swiss male must have a gun, except for those who have to carry a mortar or missile launcher. Females are not subject to universal military training, but if you go to a Swiss rifle range, there are always girls blasting away too. After 9-11, the Swiss told passengers to carry their bayonets onto their airliners . . . somewhat different from the US response of panicked victim-disarmament. (You are aware that 99% of US pilots are STILL disarmed?)
As a final defense, the Swiss have rigged the vaults of their banks for demolition. Any dictator attacking Switzerland will find the gold in his numbered bank account buried in rubble hundreds of meters under a mountain. It is known that Hitler had a numbered account.
Switzerland has also provided for defense of the lives of its civilian population against nuclear terrorism. Realizing after World War Two that nuclear weapons in the hands of power-mad idiots posed a public health threat, the Swiss started a nationwide shelter-building program in 1960. By 1991, there was enough shelter space in Switzerland to protect everyone in their home or apartment, and also enough at their workplace and school. A Swiss citizen is generally never more than a few minutes from a fallout shelter with an air filter.
The entire Swiss shelter program was accomplished for somewhere on the order of $35 (1990 dollars) per year per capita. The US spends vastly more every year to achieve a military only capable of intervening in Third World nations that don’t have WMDs. The combined US armed forces are incapable of shooting down a single ballistic missile, or even intercepting low-flying propeller planes. Nor are there bunkers with filtered air supplies for the inhabitants of our glass cities or crackerbox suburbs. The only civil defense in the US is for the President and the bureaucrats under Iron Mountain . Everyone else is nuclear fodder, except for those provident few (such as the Mormons) who build their own shelters to protect their families.
Switzerland does not send troops to intervene in other nations. Switzerland does not spend tens of billions of dollars yearly to fund dictators around the world, nor did Switzerland donate hundreds of billions of dollars to the Warsaw Pact through bank "loans." Switzerland does not send billions of dollars worth of weaponry every year to the warring tribes in the Middle East . Switzerland has no enemies. Yet the Swiss are armed to the teeth and dug into every hill and under every building.
US policy is the evil-parallel-universe inverse of the Swiss. The US intervenes everywhere, spies on everyone, supports every faction in every dispute. We have as many enemies as there are disputatious people in the world. Yet we spend more effort on disarming our own airline pilots and other law-abiding citizens than on providing shelters for our children against nuclear, chemical, or biological attack. We have an expensive conventional army, and quite a few aging offensive nuclear weapons. But no defense for our children.
But Who Would Attack Us? We’re Such Nice Guys…
What groups might think to benefit from a WMD strike on the US ? A partial list:
1. The US kleptocracy, which has reaped such vast increases in power from terrorism and war. “War is the health of the State,” and terrorism drives citizen support for war.
2. Angry relatives of the thousands of victims of “Shock and Awe.”
3. Fundamentalist Muslim politicians.
4. Fundamentalist Israeli politicians.
5. Every emerging power on Earth. The more the US sinks into the Mideast quagmire, the more chance for new powers to rise to dominance.
6. Citizens of nations ruled by US-backed dictators and oligarchs, who are victims of our Aid To Dependent Dictators programs.
7. FOX News, always looking for higher ratings.
This would have been more concise if I had listed the groups that would NOT benefit from anonymous WMD attacks on the US , to wit, the world’s libertarians, capitalists, and peace lovers of all stripes. Unfortunately, the “non-aggression principle” won’t prevent anyone from being killed by terrorism and/or anti-terrorism. So, we must all determine the best risk management strategies within our budgets.
The Likely Attacks
There are two basic categories of attacks. One type is the Jerry Bruckheimer Movie attack, typified by 9-11. Spectacular attacks that kill only a few thousand people are great for raising the Homeland Security budget, but they don’t raise the individual’s risk level that much. For most people, it would be more worthwhile to put some effort into avoiding heart disease and cancer than to try to avoid random, low-level terrorism. However, it is prudent to avoid targets with high cinematic value, like the Statue of Liberty, the Golden Gate Bridge , Arnold Schwarzenegger, etc.
The second category of attack is the “anonymous warfare” strike, intended to seriously damage the US . While it might be hard for a minor power to inflict crippling physical damage on the US , anonymous attacks can rely on a high “Homeland Security Multiplier Effect.” For every dollar of damage done by the 9-11 attack, post-attack “security” measures have done ten more. And a nuclear attack would make the post-9-11 hysteria look orderly and rational by comparison. One anonymous strike could paralyze the US for decades.
Such an anonymous attack might be nuclear, using the leftover weapons from the Cold War that are available in various backwater marketplaces:
Or budget terrorism could be launched with poison gas, germs, or even conventional explosives planted in vulnerable areas such as dams, gasoline storage tanks, chemical transport trains, etc. etc. etc.
US: Strictly DIY Civil Defense
One might think that a Homeland Security budget of over $40 billion would provide a little bit of protection for US citizens. Governments are never efficient, but some of them at least spend some tax money on its putative purpose. Swiss, Israeli, and many other nations’ civil defense programs distribute gas masks, radiation meters, financial aid for constructing shelters, etc. However, US Homeland security has provided us with: free advice from Tom Ridge . According to Tom, all a US citizen needs for protection against WMD is some duct tape and enough food for three days. Personally, I don’t think that this advice, even in full-page ads, was worth $40 billion. In any case, American families will receive no help from Homeland Security’s new director, either. US civil defense is strictly DIY.
Rest of Article Here
Linear Mode
