For the rest of the world, Switzerland is no longer neutral

Switzerland is participating in the sanctions against Russia and is therefore a party to the war. That says Christoph Blocher. And that’s what Joe Biden says too – not as directly as the SVP doyen, who is two years his senior, but with all the more reach. A few days after the outbreak of war, the US President emphasized in his Address on the State of the Unionthat half the world stands by Ukraine, thereby isolating the Kremlin chief Putin. “Even Switzerland” is this time on the side of a war party, “even Switzerland”.

With this rhetorical side note, the president of the great power finally disposed of the geopolitical unique selling point of the small state. Swiss neutrality is like an organic fruit, it grows slowly and is difficult to preserve. The decisive factor, however, is that it also tastes like organic. While people in Switzerland continue to argue about new forms of neutrality, it is no longer recognizable as such for the rest of the world.

Finland, Sweden . . . Switzerland?

How much the self-confidence and the external perception of Switzerland differ from each other in the meantime, was shown in a recent one Article by Reuters, the world’s largest news agency. Its Swiss correspondent, a Brit, summarizes the security policy debate in the country. Focus: After the Russian invasion, Switzerland is now snuggling up to NATO. On the news service Twitter alone, the article was shared thousands of times and commented on with great astonishment.

Switzerland is now following Finland and Sweden in the defense alliance, it was said. Putin is driving the Swiss army into the arms of the Americans, even Switzerland, which has been neutral for as long as anyone can remember. What is striking about the comments: only a few object that Switzerland has been working with NATO for a long time and that this partnership is only intended to be deepened. The fact that nobody in Switzerland is calling for membership is also hardly mentioned.

The thrust of the domestic political debate, which is primarily set by the presidents of the Mitte party and the FDP, is sufficient for the recipients in the vastness of the Internet to come to a clear conclusion: this is not a turning point, not a paradigm shift, it is a different, a new world – and right in the middle is Switzerland, which is no longer neutral. Well, world politics is not made on Twitter, and even the largest echo chambers should not be overestimated. But a look at the political terrain is enough to determine that actual tectonic processes are underway beneath the surface of Bundesbern.

A real war was needed for Viola Amherd first. In the days following February 24, the defense minister from the earthquake region of Valais realized that the scenarios in Ukraine that had been considered in her department for a long time had actually materialized. And that she could have co-signed the contract of sale for the 36 F-35 aircraft, which the Americans signed unilaterally long ago – even if she alienated her former companions from the left, who were critical of the army.

It also took Amherd a trip to the USA to realize that the Atlantic has become smaller after Putin’s major attack in Europe. “Switzerland will win over the United States as a reliable partner for many years to come,” she said last week after a visit to Washington that lasted several days. What she did not say: the Americans are said to have made it clear to the Swiss delegation, politely but firmly, that they expect more commitment from the neutral small state in the future, for example in connection with any deliveries of local armaments.

The big ones take care of the little ones, but not without something in return. Brussels doesn’t give Bern any raisins, Washington doesn’t give any extra sausages. Biden’s “even Switzerland” was probably more than just a rhetorical stylistic device that deserves to be mentioned. The Defense Department (DDPS) is now to clarify how it intends to deal with such expectations in the future and how close it actually wants to get to NATO.

Kremlin threatens consequences

Pälvi Pulli, head of security policy at the DDPS, anticipates the discussion in the Reuters article mentioned – far in advance. “Ultimately, the interpretation of neutrality could change,” the native Finn is quoted as saying. Pulli goes even further. Compared to Reuters, the VBS chief strategist is also considering the possibility of so-called ring exchanges. This has nothing to do with a marriage ceremony, but with the export of war material. According to this, Switzerland could use its stocks to retrofit the camps of NATO countries if they in turn delivered their weapons or ammunition to Ukraine. With an exchange of rings, the Federal Council could circumnavigate the newly tightened War Material Act.

In a guest article on CH-Media, Thierry Burkart also recently advocated “ring deals”, provided they did not circumvent neutrality. According to the FDP President, the re-export of Swiss weapons to democratic states is a “question of courage and political leadership”. The Federal Council, on the other hand, is playing for time and wants to wait for several reports before making a decision. In addition to the additional report from the DDPS on the security policy aspects of neutrality policy, Federal President Ignazio Cassis also promised a paper on neutrality with regard to foreign policy. Whether the outside view is also included here?

Not only the western countries with the USA place the current role of Switzerland in a historical context. The Russians are amazed too. A spokesman for the Russian embassy in Bern told Reuters that a departure from the previous policy of neutrality would have consequences – without saying what the Kremlin meant by that.