Guy Parmelin leaves office as a steady hand, not a political force

Guy Parmelin’s resignation does not come with much theatre, which is entirely fitting for a politician whose main asset was never drama in the first place. After almost eleven years in the Federal Council, he leaves behind a record that political scientist Georg Lutz of the University of Lausanne describes as solid, useful and, in the end, limited in its historical weight.

That cautious verdict begins with the way Parmelin entered office. His election was, in Lutz’s telling, something of a surprise for the SVP; the party had rather hoped for Thomas Aeschi. Parmelin was trusted, certainly, but not treated as the obvious standard-bearer. He had to prove himself, and for a while the media were not inclined to help him along.

His first two years in the Department of Defence, Civil Protection and Sport were especially awkward. The Gripen vote had already failed before his time in office, and he then had to reopen the fighter-jet dossier under severe budget pressure. That is a difficult brief for anyone, and one should resist the temptation to confuse a bad starting position with personal failure. Still, it did not create the kind of early momentum that builds a political legend.

He looked more comfortable later in the Department of Economic Affairs, Education and Research. There, persistence brought results: free trade agreements with China and India were concluded, and negotiations on the Mercosur agreement were advanced under his responsibility. With relations to the EU and the United States becoming more difficult, that was a pragmatic course rather than a glamorous one. In Swiss politics, pragmatism is often the only thing that survives the meeting room.

Parmelin’s strongest test came during the Covid pandemic. Lutz says he behaved as a team player and a good communicator, especially in his presidential year. The Federal Council, at least from the outside, appeared to function as a team, and Parmelin consistently backed the position of the full government. That was more disciplined than some voices in his own party might have preferred, but government has never been the place for vanity projects.

The EU dossier put him in a more delicate position, because his party’s instincts did not always sit comfortably with the demands of office. Parmelin was not the one driving the file, yet when his role was needed, he played it properly. He helped resolve the conflict between employers and trade unions, an important pillar for the agreement, and he signed it without much enthusiasm but correctly. Sometimes that is what passes for statecraft: not brilliance, just enough restraint to keep the machinery moving.

Lutz’s final assessment is therefore measured. Parmelin was a solid concordance politician and a team player who managed the balancing act between an SVP that likes loud tones and a Federal Council that requires restraint. What he was not, according to Lutz, was the minister who decisively shaped the politics of the past ten years. In a system that rewards caution and punishes excess, that may be respectable. It is not exactly the stuff of political immortality.

Written by Freya Stensrud freya.stensrud@alpineweekly.com