in particular is tantamount to a ‘breach of neutrality’. Switzerland joined the war itself out of ‘pure opportunism’ and thereby sacrificed its credibility as an intermediary, in the words of SVP doyen, Christoph Blocher. To prevent the country getting ‘sucked into wars’ in the future, Blocher and several fellow party members from the SVP launched a popular initiative designed not only to enshrine Switzerland’s ‘comprehensive, perpetual and armed neutrality’ in its Constitution, but also to codify the fact that Switzerland would neither impose sanctions on warring nations nor join any defence alliances. On 8 November, the collection of signatures for the initiative began. Until now, neutrality has been described in the Swiss Federal Constitution in only basic terms. The Parliament and Federal Council are bound, under the Constitution, to take “measures to protect the external security, independence and neutrality of Switzerland”. The Constitution dictates that Swiss foreign policy should be devoted to “alleviati[ng] need and poverty in the world and promot[ing] respect for human rights and democracy, the peaceful co-existence of peoples as well as the conservation of natural resources”. This phrasing leaves a lot of political room for manoeuvre, which is something that Blocher wants to restrict via an additional article on neutrality. Developing international collaboration It will be a few years yet until the public gets to vote on any additions to the Federal Constitution. However, now that the petition has been launched, the SVP has brought the issue of neutrality to the table in time for the next Swiss general election in 2023. The initiative is receiving active support from the Pro Schweiz (Pro Switzerland) organisation, which sees itself as carrying on the mission of the Campaign for an independent and neutral Switzerland (Auns) to reject any attempts to bring Switzerland closer to the EU. The remaining political parties see the SVP’s position on neutrality as outdated. The prevailing view is that more international collaboration is needed with regard to the war in Ukraine, instead of isolation. The Liberals (FDP) are not even ruling out a rapprochement with NATO. In addition, there are calls for a relaxation of the strict rules on exporting Swiss munitions. Supplying weapons directly to a warring party may be out of the question, but Swiss politicians view it as problematic if countries like Germany are unable to give Ukraine tank ammunition purchased from Switzerland. A commission from the Council of States is currently examining potential exceptions to this ‘ban on re-exports’. The conventional purpose of the ban is to prevent Swiss weapons from falling into the ‘wrong’ hands. Also a matter of solidarity The Federal Council is adhering to its traditional policy of neutrality, as it MARCO JORIO “No-one gets it anymore,” the moderator cried almost in despair during a political discussion programme on Swiss TV about neutrality, as the politicians around the table bandied about concepts of neutrality peppered with adjectives. In the public debate too, a confusing mix of terms like ‘integral’, ‘differential’ and ‘cooperative’ neutrality can be heard. The list of these so-called adjectival neutralities demonstrates that neutrality is not a fixed concept. “Neutrality changes its hue as events develop,” Swiss Foreign Minister Marcel Pilet-Golaz observed during the Second World War. Although an internationally recognised law of neutrality has existed since 1907, this law lays down only a few scant principles governing the rights and duties of neutral parties during war. The principle of neutrality developed from this law and has been applied autonomously by every neutral country in war and peace in order to lend credibility to national neutrality. This principle is often more overt than the law on neutrality. The various flavours of neutrality include ‘perpetual’ neutrality, as practised in Switzerland for 400 years, and ‘occasional’ neutrality, which arises only in one specific war and is applied by virtually all countries in virtually all wars. Neutrality can be armed (Switzerland, Austria) or unarmed (Costa Rica); it can be recognised by international law (Switzerland, Austria) or adopted by the country in question but not recognised by international law (Ireland). But even the perpetual, armed neutrality practised by Switzerland and recognised by international law (since 1815) has changed. Prior to the First World War, neutrality had exclusively military connotations. During the First World War, both sides waged a merciless economic war where even neutral parties found themWhat sort of neutrality? Swiss Review / December 2022 / No.6 6 Focus
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjYwNzMx