Hello and “moin”.

That’s what we say in the north of Germany, and I’m trying to make this as popular as “Grüezi”, which you say in Switzerland.

I haven’t quite managed that yet, and I hope that my current role will help me to put this into practice more effectively also at the international level.

Thank you very much for your kind invitation.

The last time Federal Councillor Ignazio Cassis and I met was in Berlin, at the beginning of June. At that time, with a certain degree of trepidation – at least on my part; as for you, Ignazio, no one could tell, of course – our focus was on Swiss domestic politics.

A decision has now been taken on the “ten million” initiative, in the way things are usually done in Switzerland. And to be honest, I believe many people in Germany have breathed something of a sigh of relief.

After all, for the Germans, Switzerland is more than just a beautiful mountain backdrop. For many, it has become a second home. The exchange between our countries is close and intensive.

Things would doubtlessly have looked a little different had the initiative been successful. It would never have divided us since we’re far too closely intertwined for that. But it would have altered the nature of our relations as neighbouring countries.

And so I’m very grateful that the Swiss people apparently saw it that way, too.

But I’d like to say that the key phrase that you, Ignazio, have reiterated here is also the one that appears right here on the second page of my speech:

domestic policy is foreign policy, and foreign policy is domestic policy.

That’s quite simply true.

It applies to Germany, and it applies to almost every country in the world.

Domestic and foreign policy are becoming ever more closely linked, and we must respond to this together as practitioners of foreign policy. Indeed, this link is becoming even clearer still in these times of tension and crisis. And there’s certainly no shortage of crises. We’re feeling their impacts in a most tangible way in our daily lives.

However, it’s by no means easy to make the connection between the pictures of a faraway crisis and the impacts on our everyday lives. Such interrelationships are complex. At the same time, however, they have become incredibly fast-moving – something that was certainly not the case a few decades ago.

I recently said that the rockets that we don’t see affect the petrol we put in our cars.

This applies not only to the price, but also to the composition of the fuel itself. Did you know that, last June, the European Union sourced 25 percent of its kerosene from Nigeria? As a substitute for the fuel we would normally have imported from elsewhere, particularly from the Gulf region. This underscores the need for us to diversify. And we have to diversify in every respect. With respect to economic dependencies and with vulnerabilities in mind. Definitely with respect to markets, but also in terms of sources of supply.

The need to diversify is one of the conclusions that we have drawn from this. The fact that we’re more vulnerable is an open secret.

We didn’t need COVID-19, the EVERGIVEN incident in the Suez Canal, Russia’s ongoing violation of international law in Ukraine, the disruptions to trade policy or the impact of extreme weather events on transport routes and supply chains to realise this.

For a number of years now, our global economy – which, as a global network, is highly sensitive to change – has been exposed to constant upheavals.

We’re responding to this by diversifying our economic relations.

You have taken note of the fact that the European Union has concluded free trade agreements with other regions at an unprecedented pace. Mercosur is one example, and India is another.

New sources of supply, new markets and, as a result, greater economic resilience – these are some of the paths that we’re treading.

At the same time, we’re consolidating the reliable partnerships that we already have.

We’re strengthening our partnerships around the world, and this applies to our bilateral relations. That’s why I’m here in Switzerland today. It goes without saying that this also applies to our alliances; I’ll say a few words about that in a moment.

That’s our policy.

Our foreign policy is, first and foremost, aimed at seeking solutions around the world to our own domestic challenges.

These challenges are indeed enormous. The economic situation is tense; technological progress is transforming the very fabric of our state before our eyes; climate change is altering the way in which we live; and the energy transition – which is not always straightforward – is putting both its supporters and its detractors to the test.

We can see what this means everywhere – including in Europe.

All of this calls for innovation and cooperation, and also the willingness to learn from others.

Travelling around the world in such a situation and lecturing people seemed to me to be somewhat out of step with the times.

That’s why I’m seeking to undertake my trips abroad not with a moralising attitude, but rather with a business delegation.

A business delegation that networks with politicians and business leaders on the ground and gets new collaborative partnerships up and running. This benefits businesses and the economy, and, at the end of the day, the people in the countries in question.

Opportunities for cooperation can be found almost everywhere, provided we’re prepared to approach our partners pragmatically and with respect.

I’ve just returned from trips to Mauritania, Nigeria and South Africa. These are countries that we certainly don’t always see eye to eye with straight away – with regard to Germany’s policy towards Israel, for example.

But in South Africa in particular – a country that is acting with much self-assurance on the multilateral stage – the focus was on our shared challenges and the aspects of our international policy that unite us.

Just like our two countries, South Africa doesn’t view international law as a friendly recommendation from the past, but as a guiding principle for international policy.

I can only agree with that. And I’d like to emphasise this especially at this time, when an important court on the international stage is coming in for criticism and is even under attack. In any case, on behalf of the Federal Government, I’d like to make it clear that we stand behind the International Criminal Court and all of its judges, and that we’re fully convinced that they’re doing valuable work to further the cause of peace and justice in our world.

However, I also have to take economic interests and those of our alliance system into account in my foreign policy considerations.

We’re building new partnerships around the world to this end, and we’re strengthening alliances that safeguard our freedom, our security and our prosperity in Germany and Europe. These alliances traditionally include NATO and, in particular, the European Union.

I’m therefore seeking to act on the world stage not only as Germany’s Foreign Minister, but also as one of the EU’s Foreign Ministers. Many countries and regions – I’m thinking here of the Mercosur states and India, which I mentioned earlier, but I could also add Australia – are seeking access to the EU’s single market. This affords us, for our part, access to interesting markets and sources of raw materials. At the same time, it makes us more independent in the area of customs policy, because it gives us the opportunity to respond effectively together.

So Germany’s foreign policy is – as I said just now – geared towards consolidation. And perhaps I can put this a little more clearly: it’s aimed at consolidating and strengthening the European Union.

I’m aware that Switzerland’s attitude towards the EU is somewhat ambivalent. Many perceive Brussels to be a bureaucratic behemoth – a sentiment shared by some people in my country – whose commissioners, armed with clipboards and measuring tapes, over-regulate the everyday lives of citizens. And I’ll admit that some policy areas, despite well-intentioned aims in theory, have become highly complicated in practice.

But is it not precisely in these turbulent times that we see the benefit of an alliance of many countries?

The single market is a driver of growth and innovation. As the voice of many, and through its combined market power, the EU can negotiate differently with the US than individual countries. It is able to stand up to the impacts of aggressive Chinese economic policy.

And it stands firmly united against an imperialist Russia.

I believe that our interests here are also aligned with those of Switzerland, and I want to make the case here, quite candidly and forcefully, for continuing to build on our close partnership.

It is my firm belief that our cohesion in Europe extends beyond the EU member states. Switzerland also benefits from this. Together, we can strengthen our pan-European competitiveness.

Germany stands ready to work with Switzerland on our shared European interests. Our hand is always outstretched for this, and my door is always open to you.

Another issue is our security. Here, of course, we rely on NATO.

We are, after all, strengthening NATO to a massive degree. You have been following this. We will achieve the five percent target well ahead of schedule. Germany was long hesitant about this. But now we’re frontrunners once more in achieving the defence capabilities required for our country and for the Alliance.

Furthermore, we – the European NATO Allies and Canada – agreed at the summit in Ankara to jointly support Ukraine with military assistance totalling at least 70 billion euro this year and next.

We know that we owe Ukraine our support simply for reasons of self-respect, because we’re defending international law. But also because we know what a Russian “victory” would mean, politically and economically, for the entire continent.

That’s why I’m calling across Europe for a clear stance – a stance in support of Ukraine – including, of course, here in Switzerland.

When it comes to security, however, it goes without saying that we also rely on transatlantic solidarity. This is something that some international observers like to disparage. And yes, a number of statements coming out of Washington have also raised eyebrows in Berlin.

But, and I say this with all due candour, also following the summit in Ankara, we have no reason to doubt the reliability of our US Allies. Above all, it’s important that we in Europe take greater responsibility for security on our continent.

On the flight here, I read an interesting article on this subject. After all, security cannot be boiled down solely to traditional military security. This article by a Swiss journalist from the beginning of May bore the headline “The Alps are Europe’s Strait of Hormuz”.

In his article, the journalist describes the strategic role played by the Alpine countries – and by Switzerland in particular – within the European security framework.

In our analyses and assessments, we tend to focus on the front lines in Ukraine or the threat situation along NATO’s eastern flank.

However, we’re genuinely vulnerable where the basic supply of our population is called into question.

Where Russia and other hostile actors are engaging in hybrid attacks against our interests.

Strategic supply routes run here in the Alpine region in the areas of energy, transport and data. And, quite fundamentally, water – if I just consider the Rhine.

Switzerland’s security is therefore of paramount importance to its neighbouring countries.

If we broaden the traditional understanding of security, it becomes clear that, for all of its geographical advantages, Switzerland is just as vulnerable as any other frontline state.

The cyberattack on Liechtenstein just a few weeks ago showed that even a country that is neutral and without alliances can become the target of an attack.

Switzerland, too, has recently had to face this reality, albeit on a completely different, smaller scale.

My conclusion from this is that neutrality alone is no guarantee of a peaceful life. It cannot replace defensive capabilities. But I don’t think I need to tell you that.

It goes without saying that we’re following the current debate on this issue in Switzerland with keen interest, and I think the high calibre of this debate is remarkable.

I have studied the arguments on both sides closely. After all, the outcome of this Swiss domestic dispute will also have an impact on the nature of our relations.

“So what do you think about neutrality?” – that could well be the crucial question on the minds of the Swiss people these days.

Personally, I have the utmost respect for a cosmopolitan Switzerland as an integral part of Europe and for its neutral stance. I believe that this can be said of almost all Germans.

And we must not lose sight of the fact – and I know this, we know this – that Swiss neutrality has served us well time and again in the world of diplomacy, and will continue to do so. Because it has been practised flexibly and pragmatically, and discussed and explained with great transparency and sincerity. Swiss neutrality has often been to the benefit of the international community.

In my view, the question of neutrality is also a question of political credibility. Towards one’s own citizens, but also towards partners, friends and neighbours abroad. I believe that neutrality should not be justified on the grounds of weakness or fear, nor should it stem from warmongering. And you’re not doing that either.

At the end of the day, it must answer the question of how it intends to assume responsibility for the economic and political ties that ensure its survival.

For all the friendship, familiarity and cooperation between our countries, we must acknowledge that we’re operating in a geopolitical environment that has become harsher and more hostile.

I’m convinced that we should stand even more closely together.

Ladies and gentlemen, Excellencies,

I’d like to express my sincere thanks once again for your kind invitation.

There are still many issues that concern our two countries, and which you and I, Ignazio, will discuss further.

I’m looking forward to continuing this discussion with you all now. Thank you very much for your attention.