The notion of negotiating as a political process has proved to be inherent to Switzerland’s internal composition and geopolitical position. From its founding as the alliance between small states that had nothing to offer to greater powers in exchange for their protection, to the merely imposed “armed neutrality” declared in 1815 making its territory the buffer zone between rival empires. Finding agreement has been the first necessity and purpose of Swiss organizational structures. The myth of the 1291 founding agreement has even become a narrative device as the landscape bearing the memory of its negotiation is the backdrop to the Nationalrat’s deliberations, making the parliament the modern place for negotiation between the federated Cantons.
Acknowledging that upcoming challenges will increase political instability and a sense of dissociation between citizens and elected officials, the communication channels need to be strengthened: in between elections, citizens, interest groups, and elected officials need a place to convene whenever a public political crisis arises.
This proposal is based on previous research work. Through the analysis of a well-known diplomatic negotiations between Switzerland and Libya, spatial parameters were extracted that play into the power balance. These are malleable enough to be applied to interpersonal or public negotiations as well. For example, power imbalance can be inflated through an asymmetric spatial knowledge and agility, or by the territorial appartenance of meeting spaces to one or another party. As well, the balance can be moderated by stating symbolic safe-havens for each party, and by using a level of formality that reflects both parties’ aims.
How can this strong, coordinated action be used as a lever for discussing measures with elected officials in place?