Swiss voters overwhelmingly rejected a proposal to strengthen the country’s neutrality in a referendum on Sunday, with around 70% voting against the measure.
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
According to the final results published by the Swiss government, the proposal was rejected in all 26 Swiss cantons.
The move would have limited Switzerland’s ability to impose sanctions on other countries, only allowing such measures if they had been approved by the United Nations.
This would have limited Switzerland’s ability to adopt sanctions against Russia, which holds veto power as one of the five permanent members of the UN Security Council.
Supporters of the proposal, led by the far-right SVP, argued that Switzerland had moved too close to the European Union and NATO, particularly since Russia’s large-scale invasion of Ukraine.
“This result does not constitute a vote against neutrality,” Swiss Foreign Minister Ignazio Cassis said on Sunday during a press conference to announce the results of the referendum.
“Switzerland was neutral yesterday, it will be neutral today and it will remain so,” he stressed.
A costly campaign ends in defeat
The initiative was championed by Christoph Blocher, an 85-year-old billionaire and influential SVP figure, with campaign posters promoting the so-called “neutrality initiative” bearing the slogan “No to war”.
His defeat was widely anticipated. According to Swiss media, the Foreign Ministry in Bern had privately predicted the outcome several weeks before the vote.
Despite the expected result, Blocher invested heavily in the campaign.
According to the Swiss newspaper Berner Zeitung, he spent 3.8 million Swiss francs on the initiative, which would be the largest sum ever contributed by a single individual to a Swiss referendum campaign.
The result sparked criticism from political opponents.
“The initiative would have set neutrality in stone and would no longer have made it possible to respond adequately to a given situation,” said Susanne Vincenz-Stauffacher, a member of the Swiss National Council, referring to Russia’s war against Ukraine.
She warned that defining neutrality in such rigid terms could prevent Switzerland from imposing sanctions on an aggressor.
“At the end of the day, you are not neutral but on the side of the aggressor,” she said.
“Blocher has completely lost his way here,” said Marianne Binder, a Center Party deputy in the Council of States representing Aargau.
What does neutrality mean for Switzerland?
Switzerland has long maintained a policy of neutrality and is not a member of any military alliance.
However, the interpretation of this neutrality has been the subject of political debate for years, particularly since Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.
The Swiss government currently advocates a policy of “cooperative neutrality,” whereby the country remains militarily non-aligned while retaining the ability to impose sanctions when it deems them necessary to enforce international law.
Swiss Defense Minister Martin Pfister also called for closer cooperation with NATO.
The rejected initiative aimed to include “perpetual and armed neutrality” in the Swiss Constitution. It would also have limited military cooperation with NATO to situations involving imminent military attack.
Even though Swiss voters rejected the proposed restrictions, support for neutrality itself remains widespread.
According to the latest poll cited in the debate, 82% of those questioned continue to support Switzerland’s neutrality.
The referendum was part of Sunday’s nationwide votes on state and local issues.
Under Switzerland’s system of direct democracy, citizens typically vote four times a year on bills, constitutional amendments and other political issues.
Gn world
