Brussels: Switzerland's decision to impose curbs on immigrants from the European Union has reignited the debate on freedom of movement in Europe, as leading EU states warned Switzerland there would be repercussions for a vote that stunned and infuriated Brussels.
Laurent Fabius, the French foreign minister, called the decision "worrying", adding: "We will have to review our relations with Switzerland. Switzerland is not a considerable economic power... it lives off the EU."
EU to review its ties with Switzerland
Julie Bishop busts a move in Indonesia
Key moments in the US-Australia relationship
Iceland's Pirate Party
Are Mariah Carey and James Packer over?
Trump opens hotel blocks from White House
Two earthquakes hit central Italy
Can Florida give Trump a path to White House?
EU to review its ties with Switzerland
Voters in Switzerland back proposals that restrict the movement of citizens to and from the EU and could undermine bilateral agreements with its neighbours.
Viviane Reding, the deputy chief of the EU's executive, said Switzerland could not expect to keep the benefits of free trade without accepting freedom of movement. "That is not possible. You take them all or you leave them all," she said.
Wolfgang Schauble, Germany's pro-European finance minister, said the vote must be viewed as a signal for politicians elsewhere in Europe.
"We regret this decision. It will cause a lot of difficulties for Switzerland."
In contrast, Britain claimed the Swiss referendum, in which 50.3 per cent of Swiss voters called for immigration quotas to be imposed by 2018, reflected "growing concern around the impact that free movement can have.
"That is why the Prime Minister and other ministers have been raising this issue, and will continue to do so, with their counterparts across the EU. Clearly the EU and Switzerland will now have to enter into a period of discussion."
Free movement of people and jobs within its borders is one of the fundamental policies of the EU. Switzerland, while not a member, has operated an agreement since 2002 in which citizens have been able to cross the border freely and work on either side as long as they have a contract or are self-employed.
Jean Asselborn, the Luxembourg foreign minister, said there would be consequences for Switzerland.
"You can't have privileged access to the European internal market and, on the other hand, dilute free circulation."
Other EU foreign ministers accused the Swiss of xenophobia. The vote was originally proposed by the Right-wing populist Swiss People's Party.
"We are seeing throughout Europe the rise of what can only be called a far-Right agenda," said Ireland's Eamon Gilmore.
Thierry Repentin, France's junior minister in charge of EU affairs, linked the Swiss debate to British hostility to Bulgarian and Romanian migrants who have been allowed free access since January 1.
He noted that Britain also raised "some questioning" on free movement in the EU, but said the matter was now closed because EU law enshrines the principle.
Mr Repentin added that Swiss feeling was not representative of wider Europe. "This vote... should not be extrapolated to say what people in Europe think of free movement," he said.
But nationalist parties in Europe welcomed the Swiss vote as indicative of an overall rejection of recent strides to deeply integrate the bloc by easing restrictions and allowing people to live, work and study, but also draw welfare benefits, in each other's countries.
"It is becoming more and more obvious to people across Europe that unfettered free movement from the poorest countries on the continent into the more advanced ones with higher living standards and welfare entitlements is unsustainable," Britain's UK Independence Party said in a statement.
Polls predict that European Parliament elections in May will return the most Eurosceptic assembly in its history.
Filip Dewinter, a leading member of the Flemish nationalist party in Belgium, the Vlaams Belang, described the Swiss vote as "a very important signal". He said the rise in Euroscepticism was linked to EU immigration law and its unwillingness to take people's concerns seriously.
"What happened in Switzerland would be happening all over Europe, but only the Swiss have direct democracy with referendums, which makes it possible for people to express themselves," he said. "This has nothing to do with racism... it's about taking away people's way of life, their culture."
New York Times, Telegraph, London