Two Stories - Swiss Backlash Against Islamization and EU Control

Backlash: Geneva's biggest mosque to be run by Swiss management after linked with terrorists

The Geneva mosque (Keystone / Salvatore Di Nolfi)

Switzerland’s largest mosque, which has been embroiled in various controversies, is to come under Swiss management.

“It is time to hand over the mosque in Geneva to a Swiss executive board, which is representative, with an elected president board: a mosque integrated into Swiss democracy,” Mohammad bin Abdul Karim Al-Issa, secretary-general of the Saudi Arabia-based Muslim World League, told Le Matin Dimanche newspaper.

Management and financing of the mosque, which is situated in the neighbourhood of Petit-Saconnex, should be ensured by Swiss Muslims, he said. Funding could some from member donations and private donations, he added.

The construction of the mosque was financed by Saudi Arabia. It was inaugurated in 1978 by former Saudi king Khalid bin Abdulaziz and is the biggest in Switzerland, being able to host 1,500 worshippers. MWL has been underwriting a substantial part of the mosque’s finances.

The mosque has however attracted scrutiny from French and Swiss authorities over possible links to extremists. 

‘Safe hands’

Similar measures to those in Geneva have been taken around the world in collaboration with national authorities, Al-Issa explained in the interview. “Foremost for security reasons. We have to ensure that the mosques are in safe hands, of course. After that we will not need to intervene.”

Hopeful, positive, but more than a little naive.

The Islamic Cultural Foundation of Geneva, which had been involved in the running of the mosque and which is linked to the MWL, will become a separate entity and work on dialogues between the religions, both in Switzerland and abroad, the former Saudi justice minister said.

At the end of 2017, four mosque employees were fired and the management changed after Al-Issa visited the institution. The four French employees, including two imams, had reportedly been placed by French officials on a backlist known as “Fiche S”. This is reserved for individuals who are considered potential threats to French national security.

In 2015, the Tribune de Genève reported that 20 young extremists had attended the mosque for several months, two of whom allegedly travelled to Syria.  

Al-Issa told Le Matin Dimanche that three essential objectives had not been achieved at the mosque. “The mosque should have become a cohesion factor. Representatives from other religions should have been able to rely on it. And finally, a place of worship shouldn’t keep on being a subject of concern and debate. So instead of closing it, we are giving it to everyone. That’s a better solution, isn’t it?”

I'm not totally convinced! It's impossible to integrate Islam into democracy, Christian or otherwise. You will find out. But, at least you are doing something.

Swiss to vote again on EU migrant curbs

EUA and EURACTIV.com with AFP

File photo. A photo made available 25 February 2016 shows a political advert (R), a montage of the white cross of the Swiss national flag and the Swastika symbol, at the SBB train station Cornavin in Geneva, Switzerland, on 23 February 2016. [Salvatore di Nolfi/EPA/EFE]

The Swiss will in May vote on a proposal that could dramatically limit immigration from the EU, six years after a similar referendum nearly destroyed relations with the bloc.

The Swiss government announced Wednesday (15 January) that the so-called “limitation initiative” would be one of the issues on the ballot for the year’s second round of popular votes, on 17 May.

The initiative, backed by the populist rightwing Swiss People’s Party (SVP) and opposed by the government, calls for the country to revise its constitution to ensure it can autonomously handle its immigration policy.

Anti-immigration; Eurosceptic

SVP, Switzerland’s largest party, has built its brand by condemning immigration as well as the influence of the European Union in non-EU-member Switzerland.

If the initiative passes, Swiss authorities would have one year to negotiate an end to its 1999 agreement with Brussels on the free movement of persons between Switzerland and the bloc.

The initiative goes even further than a similar initiative, also backed by SVP, that was voted on in February 2014. It demanded that Bern impose quotas on migration from EU countries.

EU-Swiss relations in turmoil after immigration vote

Swiss voters yesterday (9 February) narrowly backed proposals to reintroduce immigration quotas with the European Union. The European Commission regretted the result which it said contravened the principle of free movement of persons between the EU and Switzerland. “The EU will examine the implications of this initiative on EU-Swiss relations as a whole,” the EU executive said. 

That vote narrowly passed, throwing Swiss-EU relations into disarray, with Brussels warning that any curbs on immigration by EU citizens put in doubt a whole range of bilateral agreements.

SVP condemns compromise as ‘betrayal’

Bern struggled for years to find a way to respect the will of the people without permanently alienating the neighbouring EU, its main trading partner.

After lengthy negotiations, the agreement reached in late 2016 stopped far short of an initial plan to impose quotas on resident permits issued to EU citizens, which Brussels had fiercely rejected.

Instead Bern opted to merely require Swiss employers to jump through a few bureaucratic hoops before hiring from the bloc, and to prioritise Swiss job seekers, at least ostensibly.

SVP condemned that compromise as a “betrayal” and a capitulation to the EU.

The upcoming vote in May is part of Switzerland’s direct democracy system, in which voters cast ballots on a wide range of national, regional and local issues every few months.

Any initiative to modify the constitution that gathers 100,000 signatures is put to a popular vote, while 50,000 signatures are enough to call a referendum opposing a law voted by parliament.

Other questions on the May ballot will be whether childcare costs should be tax-deductible, and one on opposition to a recent revision of Switzerland’s federal hunting law, which conservationists say does not go far enough to protect wildlife.