Swiss voters reject tougher neutrality plan with 70% against

Swiss voters rejected a proposal to write a stricter definition of neutrality into the country's constitution, with final results showing 70.1% voting against the plan and a majority in all 26 cantons rejecting it. The initiative, championed by the Swiss People's Party and the pro-sovereignty Pro Switzerland organisation, would have barred Switzerland from joining punitive measures against other countries unless imposed by the United Nations.theguardian.com

The result settles a debate over how Switzerland applies its neutrality in a period of war in Ukraine. Neutrality has been enshrined in the constitution since the mid-19th century, but Switzerland's decision to mirror European Union sanctions against Russia after the 2022 full-scale invasion reopened questions about what the principle requires. The vote shows voters want the government to keep discretion over how neutrality is applied rather than have it fixed in the constitution.politico.eu

What the initiative would have changed

The proposal called for the constitution to guarantee that Swiss neutrality is "armed and perpetual". It would have prevented Switzerland from pursuing closer ties with NATO, ruling out any military alliance except in the event of an attack on the country. It would also have prohibited the imposition of sanctions unless called for by the United Nations. Because Russia holds veto power as one of five permanent members of the UN Security Council, a yes vote could have effectively blocked sanctions against Moscow.thejournal.ie

The Swiss government, parliament and most major political parties opposed the measure, arguing it was too rigid and would limit the country's room for manoeuvre at a time of heightened geopolitical tensions. The government warned that Switzerland would cease to be a reliable partner in international security policy, leaving the country less secure in the event of an attack and heavily restricting its ability to cooperate with NATO. Opinion polls had also suggested most voters would reject it.

The Swiss People's Party was the only political party backing the initiative. SVP vice president Celine Amaudruz said during a televised debate that the party's goal was to foster peace, diplomacy and dialogue, and that this required credibility through perpetual armed neutrality. The party's billionaire backer Christoph Blocher was a prominent supporter, reported by Bloomberg to have spent 2m francs on the campaign. The SVP accepted the defeat and said it had no current plans for further action.

Who backed and opposed the plan

Supporters argued the government had moved dangerously close to the European Union and NATO, particularly over Russia's war in Ukraine, threatening Switzerland's security and independence of action. The proposal emerged following Switzerland's decision to join EU sanctions against Russia. Opponents, including Green party lawmaker Sibel Arslan, argued the government already had the leeway it needs to protect national interests. Arslan said voters understood the SVP wanted Switzerland to isolate itself internationally.

Switzerland's neutrality was formally recognised after the end of the Napoleonic wars in 1815, and the country's traditional position dates back to 1516. The country is not a member of any military alliance, though it has cooperated with NATO for three decades. Russia's foreign ministry praised the initiative while criticising Switzerland's adoption of EU sanctions and claiming the country was abandoning neutrality. Katy Romy, a correspondent for SwissInfo, wrote that the yes campaign was unable to shed perceptions it was acting in Russian interests.

Why neutrality was contested

Foreign Minister Ignazio Cassis told journalists in Bern as the figures were announced that the result was not a vote against neutrality, adding that Switzerland was neutral yesterday, would be neutral today and would remain neutral. During a recent televised debate, Cassis said neutrality had always been applied with a degree of flexibility, and that neutrality does not mean indifference. He stressed Switzerland had no plans to lift a ban on selling arms to countries in conflict, including Ukraine.

Voters on both sides cited security concerns. Ruth Bolomey, a 65-year-old retiree originally from Hawaii, said she voted for the initiative because she believed Switzerland needed to keep neutrality for security reasons. Jihad Azkoul, a 78-year-old New York native, said he voted no with the question of what would happen if Russia attacked in mind, and whether Switzerland would get protection from its neighbours.

The vote formed part of a round of Swiss referendums on local and national issues. Under Switzerland's system of direct democracy, voters typically cast ballots four times a year to help determine government policy. The Pro Switzerland organisation collected enough signatures to trigger the referendum on better anchoring neutrality in the constitution, concerned over Switzerland's decision to back the European Union's economic pressure on Russia.

Swiss voters face another neutrality question later this year. In November, they will be asked to assess whether Switzerland's arms export rules are still fit for purpose or whether the country should be allowed to export weapons to a defined group of 25 mostly Western countries, even if they are involved in an ongoing conflict. If approved, that change would tighten Swiss ties with Western countries and could boost its defence industry's export earnings.