Guisan explained Switzerland’s unique marksmanship culture:
While traversing Switzerland on Sundays, everywhere one hears gunfire, but a peaceful gunfire: this is the Swiss practicing their favorite sport, their national sport. They are doing their obligatory shooting, or practicing for the regional, cantonal or federal shooting festivals, as their ancestors did it with the musket, the arquebus, or the crossbow. Everywhere, one meets urbanites and country people, rifle to the shoulder, causing foreigners to exclaim: “You are having a revolution!”94
Guisan waxed religious, and even mystic, in describing military exercises in the Alps. Troops climbed to the summits in a form of “military worship”; at the top, the “rustic pulpit,” rifles were stacked and the flag fluttered. “In this eternal, unchanging framework, in this sublimity of nature, one feels more than elsewhere the stability and continuity of the historic mission of our army.”95
Men aged and died and governments changed, but the traditions and army endured. “Small army, yes, but made strong by the traditions that she has in her heart and in her blood.” On the other hand, values which had to be jealously preserved had lately been confronted by spiritual confusion, uncertainties, foreign influences contrary to the national spirit, and the “various mystical racists”96—an obvious reference to German National Socialism.
Guisan recalled the army’s readiness to defend Switzerland against the horrors of the Franco-Prussian War of 1870–71, the Great War of 1914–18, and the Moscow-inspired insurrectionist threat in 1918.97 The Swiss Army thereafter withstood proponents of disarmament, pacifism and Bolshevism.98
When Guisan made those reflections, European tension was increasing: after the rise of the Nazis and Germany’s rearmament had followed the occupation of the Rhineland, the plebiscite of the Saar (returning it to Germany), the civil war in Spain, the annexation of Austria and then, in September 1938, the annexation of Czechoslovakia, which brought “us within two fingers of war.”99 Anxiety was growing despite Switzerland’s neutrality, which could only be maintained by an army capable of resisting attack.100 The League of Nations had failed, and Hitler had bluntly declared that he recognized only rights that could be defended.101
According to Guisan, absolute neutrality and a strong army were inseparable. Switzerland was in a strategic position that those who sought to dominate the continent would envy. The nation would continue to exist only if it was strong enough to defend itself.102
The Swiss people understood defense needs and favored the modernization of armaments despite the great expense. The army was stronger than ever. The border troops were ready for a surprise attack. “The true Swiss defense,” said Guisan, “is where the soldier, protected by fortifications and barricades, defends his cottage, his farm, his earth. He knows each rock, each tree, each path.” He emphasized that the moral element predominates and that all citizens needed to participate.103 “The army is like a factory of the nation in arms.”104 Guisan concluded that national defense rested not just on weapons but on reason and faith. The people had to be prepared to bear the trials of modern war and “to resist to the end.” They needed to use the “greatest harshness against the fellow travelers in ideologies inconsistent with our democracy, against the agents of every foreign dictatorship.” 105
“The moral preparation of a people is as necessary as the material preparation, and means the mobilization of the spirit.” Guisan insisted that “the oldest soldierly people in Europe must know neither defeatism nor fear; dignity forbids it!” What were dictatorships, with their mystical theories, compared with Swiss patriotism?106 Responding to Guisan’s challenge and the evocation of their ancient heritage, as the fateful year of 1939 approached, the Swiss continued to prepare for the military challenge they now believed was imminent.
Chapter 3
1939
Hitler Launches World War II
AT THE BEGINNING OF 1939, THE SWISS VIEWED THEIR GIANT neighbor to the north and east with a wary eye. Ominous signs indicated that their concern was fully justified.
Before unleashing the German Army to cross a neighbor’s borders, the Nazis characteristically turned up the heat on their intended prey by launching a series of press attacks. Accordingly, the Swiss were distressed when, in early January, a spate of vehemently anti-Swiss articles suddenly appeared in the state-controlled German press. These articles asserted that criticism of the Nazis by Switzerland’s (uncensored) press was incompatible with neutrality and warned the Swiss government to suppress the criticism. One of the leading Nazi organs, the National-Sozialistische Monatshefte, castigated Switzerland’s policy of welcoming political refugees from Germany. The Swiss minister in Berlin, Hans Frölicher, was instructed to discuss the attacks with German authorities.1
On January 30, a few hours before the start of Hitler’s annual Reichstag speech, this one marking the sixth anniversary of his coming to power, the apprehensive Swiss government announced an ordinance giving it the power to mobilize the militia without further notice. As it turned out, the Führer’s speech did not single out Switzerland as the next target of the Reich; the bulk of his oration merely stressed the military might of Germany and Fascist Italy.2 Nevertheless, during the winter of 1938–39, General Franz Halder, chief of the German General Staff, instructed Major General Eugen Müller to prepare a study on whether advantages would be gained by an incursion into Switzerland in the event of a French-German war. Weighing the factors of terrain and potential Swiss resistance, Müller recommended against a Swiss invasion at that time.3
Responding to the perceived threat, the Swiss shooting associations, among others, continued to encourage the strongest measures of preparedness. A rifleman from a mountain canton exhorted the people to resolve “to give our hearts and our blood” to defend the country against any attempted foreign takeover. He continued:
We owe it to our ancestors, who always appreciated freedom and independence as the highest value. But we owe it also to those who will live after us, and to whom we wait to bestow our fatherland whole. . . . May the spirit of the Rütli especially beckon us riflemen, the spirit who goes through our history like a red line and which Schiller put in these words: “We must trust to God on high and never be intimidated by the power of man. It is better to die than to live in slavery!”
This parallel to the famous oration of Patrick Henry was characterized as “spiritual national defense” of the highest quality.4
Meanwhile, to the east, Nazi agents were stirring up the Slovaks against the Czechs. On March 11, General Keitel drafted an ultimatum for Hitler under which Germany would acquire Bohemia and Moravia, the western, Czech portion of the country (the modern Czech Republic). The Czechs were admonished not to resist the military occupation.5 That same day, as the Slovak cabinet met, five German generals burst into the meeting and ordered them to declare Slovakia’s independence at once. Slovak Premier Monsignor Tiso and Deputy Prime Minister Ferdinand Durcansky were summoned to Berlin. On March 13, the Führer dictated the terms.
Czechoslovak President Emil Hácha requested an audience with Hitler, however by the time he arrived in Berlin with his Foreign Minister, German troops had already occupied several Czech locations. Hitler informed Hácha that a full invasion was imminent and that “resistance would be folly.” Hácha was instructed to warn the Czech people not to resist and was told the surrender must be signed immediately.6 Hácha telephoned the Czech cabinet in Prague advising capitulation.
The meeting with Hitler had gone on only three-and-a-half hours before Hácha signed the prepared document placing the fate of the Czech people and country in the hands of the German Führer. Just two hours later—it was now 6:00 A.M. on March 15—German troops occupied Bohemia and Moravia. There was no resistance.7 Meanwhile, Tiso had returned home, and on March 16 telegrammed Berlin asking for German protection and declaring independence.8 The German occupation of Slovakia began.
Thus, Czechoslovakia ceased to exist. The population and armed forces offered no
resistance. Britain and France had guaranteed the sovereignty of the country at Munich the previous autumn, but now did not lift a finger in response.9
Nazi occupation authorities immediately imposed repressive conditions on the former Czechoslovakia. The London Times announced: “All popular gatherings were forbidden; and weapons, munitions, and wireless sets were ordered to be surrendered immediately. Disobedience of these orders, the proclamation ended, would be severely punished under military law.”10 It is still remembered today, some sixty years later, that on the first day the Nazis occupied Czechoslovakia they put up posters in every town ordering inhabitants to surrender all firearms, including hunting guns.11 The penalty for disobedience was death. Lists of potential dissidents and other suspects had already been prepared, and those persons disappeared immediately.12
The takeover of Czechoslovakia—a multi-ethnic state only a short distance away—was deplored in Switzerland, whose press called for preservation of national unity at all costs and the cessation of all internal differences and strife.13 Federal Councillor Hermann Obrecht, in a speech on March 15 to the New Helvetic Society, reacted to the Anschluss of Austria and the dismemberment of Czechoslovakia with the warning: “Those who honor us and leave us in peace are our friends. Those, on the other hand, who seek to attack our independence and our political integrity will be met with war. It is not from Switzerland that one goes on pilgrimages to foreign lands”14—a reference to the “pilgrimages” to Hitler undertaken by national leaders who would then surrender their countries to the Führer.
In a broadcast to the Swiss people on March 18, Federal President Philipp Etter discussed the profound repercussions caused by the entry of German troops into Czechoslovakia and by its disappearance as an independent state. He said that “each citizen is resolved bravely to make all possible sacrifices to conserve for our country its independence and liberty in the midst of the danger of the present hour.”15
Meeting on March 20, the Swiss Parliament reaffirmed its declaration of the previous March, when German troops occupied Austria, that the Swiss were ready to defend the nation’s inviolability “to the last drop of blood.” Federal President Etter told Parliament that Switzerland had nothing to add to this declaration since her determination to defend her neutrality and independence was well known to neighbor states.16
Finance Minister Wetter announced in Bern on March 22 that increased defense costs would triple the national debt, which would now amount to about 1,000 francs per capita. The citizens, though, would gladly bear the burden if they secured the right “to live in their immemorial liberty and in their modest but comfortable Swiss home.”17
Military Department head Rudolf Minger told Parliament on the same day: “Today all preparations for war mobilization, with or without sudden attack, are in readiness. The arrangements for protecting the frontier will function automatically; there will be no need of waiting for a general’s orders.”18 Minger’s statement reflected the habit of the nearly invincible Swiss armies of the late medieval period to go into battle without an overall leader or general—the men themselves simply knew what to do. The centuries-old military practice of a well-armed citizens army could still effectively defend against a twentieth-century war of total aggression.
Preparing for an attack, the Swiss intensified work on fortifications along the Rhine and in the cantons bordering the former Austria. Heavy artillery, machine guns and ample stocks of munitions were concentrated in those areas. At Zurich, Schaffhausen, Basel, and other large industrial centers, anti-aircraft batteries were moved into position. Most households had gas masks. Mines under all bridges and roads leading into Switzerland were still in place from the Munich crisis, and there was now twenty-four-hour surveillance at all of these roads and bridges.19
On March 25, the frontier reserves were called out to guard the German border.20 The next day, it was reported that large bodies of German troops—as many as 200,000—were being massed around and beyond Lake Constance. “Switzerland Puts Great Trust in Her Minute Men’s Ability to Hold Border,”21 read a caption in the New York Times on March 27. The newspaper reported that a general mobilization had not yet been ordered, explaining:
the Swiss have a special defense force, which, like the Minute Men of American revolutionary days, is always ready for service. The purpose of this force is to delay an invader’s advance for twenty-four hours to give the regular army time to assemble. All men in that corps keep their equipment, including arms and ammunition, at home and each knows where to go and what to do in an emergency. In a test in September the entire force reported within two hours after the alarm.22
Meanwhile, the Swiss Federal Government authorized the Military Department to call up in the course of the year all men aged 36 to 48 for six days of training.23 Then, on April 4, the government instructed the population to stockpile at least two months of food.24 It obtained large quantities of foodstuffs for army use, and, when invasion seemed imminent, moved these to fortified emplacements in the Alps.25
Not wanting the Führer to outdo him, the Italian Duce ended the independence of Albania in April.26 To the Swiss it was clear that neither of their totalitarian neighbors—the Nazis in the north and east and the Fascists in the south—had any respect for the rights of small nations.
A letter printed in a leading Swiss newspaper expressed the common sentiment of militant resistance as follows:
One must arm everybody who is capable of carrying arms and one should shoot everybody who wants to destroy our country. It would be good to make these greedy people understand that the government of each canton has the right to call up troops itself. That means that if the entire Swiss Government were taken prisoner or surrendered, resistance would not yet be broken.27
Several letters in the women’s section in the same newspaper concerned “the urgent desire of Swiss women to learn to shoot to get arms in order to defend themselves against invaders. Swiss women, it is pointed out, have fought and they sometimes decided the victory.” One letter stated: “Some people ask that we shall be ready to go into the basement in order to be quietly buried. No. Everyone a rifle in her hand and shoot the bandits.”28
A Swiss journalist from Geneva noted the democratic tradition of the local assemblies (Landsgemeinde), in which the citizens, each carrying a sword as a symbol of liberty, assemble and make the laws. He added:
Each man in Switzerland bound to do military service has his gun at home hanging on the wall to the great amazement of foreign visitors, who cannot understand that a free state allows free citizens to have their arms at home.
One thing is sure: The Swiss would use these guns; they would shoot and would not let their country fall into the hands of an enemy without defending their land with utmost readiness to give their lives for freedom. There would be few democrats in our country who would not repeat the famous words of the American hero, Patrick Henry.29
During 1939, the United States was, of course, neutral. On April 4, Secretary of State Cordell Hull denied that regulations were in force that dealt with German trade. American policy was based on equal treatment for all nations, and German participation in this policy had accordingly been invited.30 In March, American exports to Germany were $6.5 million, and imports from Germany were $5 million, both increases from the previous month.31
As U.S. Congressional hearings at that time recognized, international law sanctioned free trade by neutrals during wartime. Contraband of war, including arms and munitions, exported from a neutral was subject to search and seizure on the high seas by a belligerent. However, a neutral government incurred no liability by permitting the manufacture and shipment of such articles. In other words, international law permitted private firms in a neutral country to make and export arms to a belligerent, but the arms could be seized by another belligerent after export.32
Anticipating a long war and wishing to obtain long-term agreements to secure food and raw materials from the United States, in April and May 1939 Swiss representati
ves met with Secretary of State Hull and State Department officials. The Americans thought war could be avoided and resisted the Swiss attempt to obtain binding contracts for a supply of American goods.33 When the Swiss persisted, the Department responded that it could not make commitments until pending neutrality bills were decided in Congress.34 Finally, the Swiss were successful in obtaining contract options, and when the war broke out in September they were able to obtain large amounts of food and raw materials to store for the coming emergencies.35
Later in the year, after the war began, President Roosevelt called for an end to legislation prohibiting the export of arms to belligerents. Arms were embargoed, but the raw materials of which they were made were not. Roosevelt urged that an end to the embargo would increase arms manufacture in the United States and thus would give employment to thousands of Americans as well as contribute to the national defense. Under “the normal practice under the age-old doctrines of international law,” the President explained, in the event of a European war, “the United States would have sold to and bought from belligerent nations such goods and products of all kinds as the belligerent nations, with their existing facilities and geographical situations, were able to buy from us or sell to us.”36
The June 1939 issue of Travel magazine included a feature article on the Swiss.37 The Swiss militia, it said, “the best defensive force in Europe,” was “an army of sharpshooters who have competed for marksmen’s prizes from boyhood, trained to shoot downward from a terrain high up, able to dodge a massed air attack, too, as no troops could do whose home ground is less pitted and precipitous.”38 An official in Bern conveyed the idea that “the dictators who had just finished the erasure of a small democracy in the east of Europe—one whose army stood and did not fire—must not therefore conclude that a non-standing army in the west is likewise a non-firing one.”39
Target Switzerland Page 8