On a dull morning beside Lake Lucerne, the bus slips into yet one more tunnel. A second earlier there was water, daylight and mountains so crisp they seem almost photoshopped; then it’s concrete, sodium-yellow lighting and the steady drone of an engine trapped inside rock. A handful of visitors lift their phones, frustrated. They travelled for Switzerland’s postcard panoramas, not for its underground fixation.
A few minutes on, the light returns. There’s another valley, another picture-perfect village, and ahead another opening chewed into the mountainside like a wide mouth. The driver doesn’t so much as flinch. For him - and for most Swiss - it’s simply an ordinary Tuesday.
The country that markets itself as pure scenery is, almost unnoticed, tucking that scenery away beneath asphalt and steel.
Something about that doesn’t sit right.
Switzerland is drilling through its own myth
From abroad, Switzerland can look like a protected landscape stitched together by punctual trains. From within, the mood is more anxious. Politics circles around “capacity”, “bottlenecks” and “resilience”, and the near-automatic remedy is another tunnel.
A road tunnel. A rail tunnel. A base tunnel driven under the Alps. A second tube alongside an ageing tube. Each scheme is packaged as modernisation, as though national prestige depends on the speed with which granite can be perforated.
You can hear the instinct in everyday conversation. A queue at the Gotthard? “Add lanes.” A late train in Ticino? “Build another tube.” Infrastructure has turned into a national knee-jerk response - and, quietly, a habit.
Look at the Gotthard corridor, the country’s symbolic backbone. There’s the original road tunnel, opened in 1980. Then came the Gotthard Base Tunnel - the world’s longest rail tunnel - launched in 2016 amid fireworks and speeches promising a “new era”. Next arrives the second Gotthard road tunnel, endorsed by referendum, even though the constitution formally commits Switzerland to moving traffic from road to rail.
That additional road tube is marketed as a safety measure, not a capacity expansion. On paper, the lane count is meant to stay unchanged. Off paper, most people understand what twin bores often lead to later: pressure to use every lane, more lorries, more cars, and heavier Alpine traffic.
The same logic crops up elsewhere. Calls for a complete twin tunnel at Lötschberg. Plans around Zimmerberg. Ceneri. Fresh bypasses for towns that were promised peace when the previous bypass was approved. Switzerland repeatedly ends up one tunnel short of its own assurances.
What begins as sensible planning can start to look like compulsion. Every proposal arrives with slick renderings, safety talking points and economic forecasts running out to 2075. Critics are painted as nostalgic or naïve. Yet each billion spent beneath the surface is a billion not spent on simpler, cheaper fixes: stronger regional bus services, protected cycle lanes, safer village crossings, or night trains that replace short-haul flights.
There’s an odd mental twist, too. When a mega tunnel finally opens, it doesn’t settle the argument - it shifts the starting point. All of a sudden, a three-hour rail journey is treated as “unbearable”. A summer traffic jam - entirely predictable - becomes a national crisis.
If progress is counted only in minutes saved and metres drilled, “enough” never arrives.
When progress turns into a concrete habit
Speak with Swiss engineers and you’ll rarely hear boasting; you’ll hear reasoning. A slope is unstable. A pass becomes perilous in winter. In that mindset, a tunnel is simply the practical solution. The politics are messier: each election cycle brings a new promise that commutes, freight and holiday drives will run more smoothly - provided the next project is accepted.
A blunt way to reconsider the pattern is to ask, for every proposed tunnel: what problem are we actually trying to solve, and is driving through a mountain truly the only answer? That requires accounting for noise, dust, construction traffic and the decade of upheaval residents endure - not only the glossy ribbon-cutting at the finish.
Sometimes, the most radical stance in an Alpine country is to say, “We live with slowness here” - and to mean it.
People in central Switzerland know the loop well. A village is promised relief from lorries hammering along the main street. Then a bypass tunnel arrives, hailed as freedom. After a few years, development spreads along the new connection, logistics centres appear, traffic rises again, and the calm dissolves.
The strain shows up in small, telling ways. Children still weave around heavy vehicles on side roads because the “big solution” never dealt with basic crossings. Older residents grumble about buses that are infrequent or poorly timed. The obsession with gleaming mega-projects can easily eclipse these stubborn, everyday issues that shape real life.
Most people recognise that moment: when the grand plan fails to fix the simple thing you face every day.
Mega-projects also carry a political allure. They look good in photographs. They come with names and plaques. They give ministers a chance to wear hard hats and speak about the future. By contrast, boosting rural bus frequency barely makes the evening news. Filling potholes or adding a protected cycle lane seldom creates a “legacy”.
That imbalance helps inflate a tunnel bubble. Once major engineering firms, regions and unions stack up behind a scheme, the momentum to approve it becomes immense. Objectors are warned about “losing jobs”, “falling behind Europe” or “jeopardizing safety”.
And, honestly, hardly anyone reads the full impact reports from start to finish before voting. People vote for a narrative - and the narrative is usually: more tunnels equal progress.
How to spot the line between vision and vanity
For those who live in Switzerland - or care about it - the question isn’t whether tunnels are good or bad in principle. It’s which tunnels, and what they cost everything else. One useful habit cuts through the gloss. When a new mega tunnel is announced, step back from the polished images and ask three simple questions:
Who saves time? Who foots the bill? Who loses landscape or peace?
You don’t need specialist knowledge or spreadsheets for that checklist. It shifts attention from the machine to the people living around it. A project that mainly speeds transit traffic between Germany and Italy, while locals absorb the noise and the debt, begins to resemble structural self-sacrifice more than national progress.
It’s also a mistake to label every sceptic as anti-technology or anti-modern. Many critics take trains and drive roads; they’re simply alert to the point where scale becomes vanity. A genuine safety tunnel on a dangerous pass can be entirely justified. A fourth Alpine base tunnel designed to shave eight minutes off a business route starts to feel like a status symbol.
There’s weariness, too. When voters are asked time and again to “just approve this last piece of the puzzle”, confidence drains away. People remember the guarantees attached to the previous “final fix”: less traffic, more safety, quieter valleys. When the lived reality falls short, cynicism grows - not only about projects, but about politics.
On a bench outside Erstfeld station, where the Gotthard Base Tunnel burrows under the Alps, a retired rail worker summed it up in one sentence: “We used to build tunnels because we had no other choice. Now we build them because we forgot we have choices.”
- Look at the small alternatives first
Before celebrating a billion-franc tunnel, ask what targeted measures - bus lanes, safer crossings, dynamic speed limits - could achieve on the same corridor. - Watch the language used in campaigns
If every scheme is marketed as “historic”, “inevitable” or “the last missing link”, treat it as a warning sign. Real answers can survive nuance and doubt. - Follow who profits long-term
Construction consortia, freight lobbies and transit corridors speak loudly. Residents, hikers and hotel owners on the quiet side of a mountain speak softly. Pay attention to the quieter voices. - Ask what maintenance will cost
Tunnels age. Ventilation, lighting and security systems demand continual upkeep. The bill doesn’t stop on opening day - it merely moves to a different budget. - Remember that slowness has value
A country built on tourism, landscapes and a reputation for calm cannot endlessly trade time saved for beauty lost and still sell the same dream.
The real question hiding behind the concrete
Switzerland’s tunnel rush points to something deeper than engineering pride. It reveals a wealthy, careful country that is, beneath the surface, uneasy about standing still. Every bend on a mountain road looks like danger. Every snowstorm seems like a failure. Every traffic jam feels like a personal affront.
But the world is changing. Younger Swiss are less focused on owning cars and more concerned with climate, quiet, and wild places that still feel untouched. Visitors don’t book flights to sit inside an LED-lit tube; they come for the jolt of sun on fresh snow and the view of a train winding along a mountainside.
If the country keeps doubling down on buried mega-corridors, it could end up with immaculate transit statistics and a thinned-out sense of place. Progress measured only in kilometres of tunnel ignores more essential questions: what does it feel like to live here? What stories should people tell after crossing these mountains?
So when the next glossy brochure lands, it may be worth pausing before the vote - long enough to imagine an everyday trip a decade from now. Not the VIP inaugural run. A regular Tuesday: a bus, a child with a backpack, a commuter staring through a window.
Are they travelling in darkness or daylight? And do they still recognise the country rushing past - or has it quietly vanished behind the walls?
| Key point | Detail | Value for the reader |
|---|---|---|
| Switzerland’s tunnel boom has become a reflex | Projects like the second Gotthard road tube are framed as safety and progress, even when they risk driving more traffic through fragile landscapes | Helps readers see the difference between necessary infrastructure and a political habit of overshooting |
| Mega-projects can overshadow everyday needs | Billions go underground while local buses, bike lanes, and village safety upgrades remain underfunded or delayed | Invites readers to rethink what real “quality of life” infrastructure looks like |
| Simple questions cut through the hype | Asking who gains time, who pays, and who loses peace clarifies whether a new tunnel is vision or vanity | Gives a practical lens for future debates on big projects, in Switzerland and elsewhere |
FAQ:
- Isn’t Switzerland’s tunnel network essential for safety?
Some tunnels absolutely save lives by avoiding avalanche zones and dangerous passes. The concern is not about safety upgrades themselves, but about using “safety” as a universal argument to justify capacity increases and ever-larger projects.- Don’t tunnels reduce environmental damage by concentrating traffic?
They can reduce noise and visual impact locally, yet large new tubes also attract more traffic over time. That rebound effect can raise overall emissions and freight volumes across the Alps, shifting the problem rather than solving it.- Are these projects at least good for the Swiss economy?
Construction jobs and engineering exports benefit, yes. The risk comes when long-term maintenance costs and environmental losses outweigh the gains, or when debt and political attention crowd out smaller, smarter mobility solutions.- Could Switzerland just stop building new tunnels altogether?
Probably not. Aging infrastructure, climate risks and genuine bottlenecks still need attention. The point is to regain the ability to say “no” or “not like this” instead of treating every new drilling idea as inevitable.- What can citizens realistically do against mega-project inertia?
They can read beyond campaign slogans, support groups pushing for alternatives, ask local politicians about smaller-scale fixes, and vote with a clearer sense of trade-offs. Cultural expectations change slowly, but they do change.
Comments
No comments yet. Be the first to comment!
Leave a Comment