That phrasing was obviously hyperbole, since 100% dependence isn’t even a well-defined statement (you can not assign a simple percentage to degree of dependence). Using it as a point to argue against is misguided at best, disingenuous at worst. You should read it as “it is definitely dependent [to a high degree]” rather than “it is entirely dependent”.
They are completely landlocked by the EU and their Airspace.
Also most of their imports/exports go there.
They don’t even farm enough to sustain themselves. So yes, obviously it’s true
Landlocked does not mean dependent.
They also are not completely dependent which 100% means.
Last time I looked into imports and exports of countries Switserland was around 50-60%.
Of course it does mean that.
If the EU wants, they can fuck up Switzerland quite badly.
All they have to do is to close the borders and airspace.
The claim was “100% dependent” which is extremely incorrect.
Not a single country in the world is 100% dependent.
Furthermore, the threat of an attack does not imply dependence.
That phrasing was obviously hyperbole, since 100% dependence isn’t even a well-defined statement (you can not assign a simple percentage to degree of dependence). Using it as a point to argue against is misguided at best, disingenuous at worst. You should read it as “it is definitely dependent [to a high degree]” rather than “it is entirely dependent”.