Swiss neutrality initiative divides debate over national security

Swiss voters will decide in a few weeks whether to enshrine a stricter definition of neutrality in the constitution, SRF reported after a televised debate. The initiative was launched by the organisation Pro Schweiz and is supported by the Swiss People’s Party and the Federal Democratic Union. All other major parties, as well as the Federal Council and Parliament, oppose it.

The proposal would generally ban Switzerland from joining military and defence alliances. Cooperation would remain possible only in the event of a direct attack on Switzerland or preparations for such an attack.

Foreign Minister Ignazio Cassis argued that neutrality had protected Switzerland from wars since the foundation of the federal state. He said the government and Parliament needed to retain the ability to decide from case to case how neutrality should be applied, because every crisis and war was different.

Walter Wobmann, president of the initiative committee, criticised that flexible approach, saying it had undermined the credibility of Swiss neutrality internationally. SVP parliamentarian Monika Rüegger said neutrality protected the population and had to be clearly defined to ensure Switzerland remained a reliable partner.

Marianne Binder, vice-president of The Centre party, warned that the initiative would isolate Switzerland and damage its security. She said Switzerland needed to cooperate with other countries and act in solidarity to help provide security. SVP parliamentarian Michael Götte rejected that assessment, saying the initiative would counter what he described as Switzerland’s increasingly extensive cooperation with other countries. Switzerland did not need alliances or mutual defence obligations, he said.

The initiative would also restrict sanctions. Economic sanctions would be permitted only if approved by the United Nations Security Council. SP co-president Cédric Wermuth warned that lifting sanctions against Russia would put Switzerland on the side of the aggressor in the Ukraine war. Wobmann described sanctions as a means of warfare that took sides and primarily harmed civilians.

Wobmann said the initiative would help create a safe and peaceful Switzerland and allow the country to mediate credibly in conflicts. Cassis disagreed, saying Swiss neutrality was already recognised and respected and did not need a new definition. In his view, Switzerland was protected not by the wording of the constitution but by the way the state used neutrality as an instrument.