The small neutral state as a ‘grease’ in the geopolitical machine

It is a high-profile discussion which Pascal Lottaz, Professor of Neutrality Studies at Kyoto University, shares with his audience at “Neutrality Studies” on 14 January 2025. Under the title “Ex-diplomat reveals: NATO destroys peace”, he explores burning questions of our time with long-standing Swiss ambassador Jean-Daniel Ruch.¹

Based on Jean-Daniel Ruch’s recently book “Peace and Justice”2, published by the Weltwoche-Verlag, Lottaz and Ruch discuss the devastating role NATO is playing in the world and the associated elimination of the OSCE as a tried and tested instrument of peace-promoting dialogue between East and West. One focus of the discussion is Swiss neutrality, from a critical analysis of its current precarious state to encouraging thoughts and plans for a successful referendum on the neutrality initiative in the near future and for a positive impact of neutral/non-aligned states in world affairs.
  Some excerpts on the subject of Swiss neutrality will be reproduced here.
  Jean-Daniel Ruch studied International Relations and International Security in Geneva and Lausanne. From 1988 he worked in the Swiss Department of Defence and the Department of Foreign Affairs. Since 1994, he has worked for the OSCE as a human rights officer and election observer in numerous countries.
  He was deputy head of mission at the Swiss embassy in Belgrade (2000–2003), deputy at the UN International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia in The Hague (2003–2007) and special representative of the FDFA for the Middle East (2008–2012), Swiss ambassador to Serbia and Montenegro (2012–2016), to Israel (2016) and Turkey (2020–2023). In 2023, he was nominated by the Federal Council to head of the newly established State Secretariat for Security Policy (see box “NATO sceptic in the DDPS disrupts US plans”).
  Dr Pascal Lottaz is Associate Professor at the Faculty of Law at Kyoto University (Japan). He holds a doctorate from the National Graduate Institute for Policy Studies (GRIPS) and heads the research network NeutralityStudies.com.

Restoring credible
neutrality – a rocky road

Pascal Lottaz: “Switzerland is clearly neutral and has also said that it’s going to behave neutrally according to the rules of The Hague and is not sending weapons to Ukraine. But on the other hand, it is clearly in the camp of the West. […] So where is Switzerland going, and is there still a way for Europeans to remain neutral? Are there still neutral Europeans in your view?
  Jean-Daniel Ruch: “Maybe Ireland. Listen, I think that neutrality has to be seen like a building with three floors. The lower floor is the law of neutrality, which is basically the Hague Convention of 1907, which states you should not offer any military advantage to any of the conflicting parties. From that point of view, legally speaking, we are neutral. The second stage is the policy of neutrality, and this is very much defined by the government with little consultation of the parliament or anybody else. By taking the sanctions, which was a political act with implications on neutrality, then, and this is the third stage, we influence the perception of neutrality. To be credible, we need to be perceived as neutral. Unfortunately, because of this decision and others, also the looming accession to NATO, the perception of neutrality is not there anymore among certain big world powers. I don’t say it’s lost forever, but it will be an uphill struggle to restore the credibility of our neutrality.”

‘Interoperability’: handing over
command of the Swiss army to the USA?

Former Ambassador Ruch points out that the armies of Finland and Sweden were already prepared for joining NATO through various measures before they joined. This is “the kind of measures we are taking in Switzerland now; by the way in terms of what they called interoperability, which is actually giving the management of our army to NATO or to the Americans, let’s be clear.”
  Lottaz: “Why are we doing that? I mean, I’ve observed that too in Switzerland, that there’s so much push from certain corners of our government. Your former boss, Viola Amherd, I think, is one of the key political figures pushing for giving up Switzerland’s defence structure to NATO. And there’s no threat to Switzerland.”
  Ruch: “Well, I think it’s because of the deep penetration of American, but also Israeli, influences in all our military systems. It’s not just the army in uniform; it’s also the procurement system. I mean, the way the F-35 was selected is a scandal. A national councillor from the Socialist Party has written a book about that. And it’s either incompetence or corruption. [...] All our security systems, all of them, all aspects, are deeply penetrated by these influences.” – “The latest one is the total failure of the purchase of drones for 300 million from Israel. Now, this week there was a press conference where they said that, well, first, the drones that had to be put in service in 2019 will not be operational before 2029.” Ruch continues: “And this incompetence is the result of a blind trust in the Americans and their Israeli friends. In this case, this is procurement, but this is also true for the general assessment of the situation. If you read the latest report of our intelligence services on the threat towards Switzerland, you would believe that this document has been written either in Tel Aviv or in Washington. I mean, the enemies for Switzerland are North Korea, China, Iran, and, of course, Russia.³ Come on. I mean, this is a vision from Washington, but it should certainly not be the vision from Switzerland.”

Federal Councillors without
clear vision of Swiss identity

Many Swiss are very concerned about the current lack in politics, especially in the Federal Council, of personalities with a genuinely Swiss view on the key issues of foreign policy. The two interview partners are also concerned about this existential problem for our country. Lottaz: “How did that happen? I know that we had an independent foreign policy once upon a time. We managed to avoid two world wars. We managed to navigate the Cold War. We had a very strong foundation for what we would and wouldn’t do with certain sides, although Switzerland in the Cold War was on one side of the camp. But there was independence.”
  Ruch: “Yes, I think the reason is the people, the people who are in charge […].” In Switzerland, “there is very little democratic or civilian control over what the armed forces are doing. And simply the people who are in charge, they have been socialising, they have been trained in NATO countries. So quite naturally, they have adopted this mindset. And what happens in the administration of the Ministry of Defence is no longer balanced either by the foreign ministry, which traditionally was much, much closer to a true neutral point of view. But our foreign ministry has been largely destroyed by the current incumbent, the current minister of foreign affairs. And also at the level of the federal council, I’m talking about the politicians, the federal councillors, you no longer have someone who has a clear vision of the Swiss identity and Swiss role in the world.”
  As a long-standing Swiss ambassador, Jean-Daniel Ruch recalls, for example, former Federal Councillor Micheline Calmy-Rey, who criticised the USA at the time of the war in Iraq. “We do not have any people like that in positions of command anymore. We will see now, maybe [Alain] Berset is there. He seems to be more principled, but [as Secretary General of the Council of Europe] he has no real involvement in foreign affairs.”

2022 sanctions against Russia:
Federal Council made no use of its leeway

Ambassador Ruch is particularly critical of the Federal Council’s rapid U-turn in February 2022, when it came to adopting the Western sanctions against Russia. While he acknowledges that Switzerland’s position in the middle of Western Europe is not easy, he adds: “But I don’t think we have maybe exploited enough the room for manoeuvring that we had, because at the end of the day, between 2014, when the first sanctions against Russia were decided by the West, and 2022, we could stay outside of the sanctions just by creating a system whereby the sanctions could not be circumvented through Switzerland. Nobody has ever explained to us why this same policy was not possible after 2022. And I think we were a bit quick to join these sanctions. In a weekend, actually, the Federal Council changed its mind without ever explaining to us why they did that. And I think that this has contributed to a deepened mistrust between a large part of the population and the Swiss government.” And it should be added that this has also contributed to a serious loss of credibility for Swiss neutrality in a large part of the world.

OSCE Chairmanship 2026 –
a new opportunity for Switzerland?

Pascal Lottaz and Jean-Daniel Ruch also address the importance of the OSCE and the question of whether there, Switzerland could once again take a meaningful place. According to Ruch, after the end of the Cold War, the OSCE “would have offered the right forum to have a permanent structure for European security. And by the way, Switzerland, and not only Switzerland but the other neutral states, played a key role back then to create this system, which unfortunately remained embryonic because the West wanted to push its advantage as much as possible while Russia was weak.”
  In response to Pascal Lottaz’s question: “Do you still have hope left for the OSCE and for the revival of this Cold War détente in the new Cold War?”, the diplomat points to the many imponderables of today’s world, but emphasises that the OSCE is “the only institution that exists where all states are represented on an equal footing”. Switzerland will take over the chairmanship of the OSCE in 2026, so it should get in touch with the US and Russian governments at an early stage “to see how we can usefully play a role there to bring the parties together. By the same token, try to restore a little bit of the credibility of our neutrality, which has been badly damaged since 2022.”

Neutrality initiative –
‘One of the most important referendums
we will have in Switzerland’

Jean-Daniel Ruch sums up the task ahead for Switzerland: “So I think it’s about the people and the loss of the consciousness of what it means to be Swiss, what it means to be neutral, and how important it is for Switzerland, but also for the world, I believe, to have a neutral Switzerland.”
  Pascal Lottaz: “You and I, we try to change that back, right? There is a referendum coming that’s already a done deal. […] The referendum will ask, should Switzerland go back to an integral neutrality, including neutrality when it comes to sanctions, a.k.a. no sanctions, except certain little exceptions, [...]. Now, what else is civil society doing at the moment to push back? Because I feel there’s a pushback in Switzerland, too, against this kind of megalomania of certain circles, including the media. The media is almost exclusively, not completely, but to a large extent, in the same camp of pro-NATO, pro-US …”
  Ruch: “Now, as you say, I think the people are very skeptical. The power of the traditional media is not at all what it used to be. People are getting informed through YouTube channels like yours or others, through social networks. [...] And as I think you mentioned elsewhere, this debate will be really fierce and is maybe one of the most important referenda that we will have in Switzerland.”
  As Jean-Daniel Ruch does not want to leave the concept of neutrality to a political party whose credibility in terms of a neutral stance is, moreover, in question, he has already become active: “For that reason, I’m trying, together with a number of friends, to create a movement in the French part of Switzerland, which is more neutral, which is neutral in the Swiss terms, meaning apolitical, but simply based on our patriotism and on what we believe should be our identity and our role. For that purpose, in December, we created the Geneva Centre for Neutrality.” Great news!

Network of neutral states as
urgently needed bridge builders

Ruch outlines the path of a neutral Switzerland together with other states for a more peaceful world. The aim is to counter the American/Western ideology of good and evil, which leaves little room for neutrality. “And I’m absolutely convinced that for the future of the world, you need a network of states which belong neither to one nor the other [side], who can really make the link, build bridges, and create spaces for negotiations on important issues like disarmament, arms control, and artificial intelligence.  […] The risk of a nuclear war decided by artificial intelligence is not excluded anymore in the foreseeable future. For that, you need to have negotiations, talks, and agreements. […] It seems to me that neutral states can play a crucial role in creating this framework for disarmament.” Ruch continues: “It could start with think tanks like yours and mine to create this network of people who think differently and who have a more far-reaching vision of the future and don’t want just to be members of a camp. But it’s much easier, it’s much more comfortable to be part of a camp. If you are a think tank connected to the American military industry, you will see the millions coming, you will see a lot of money, you will have positive coverage everywhere. Whereas when you want to think differently, which is not going mainstream, then everything is, of course, a little bit more difficult and requires more courage.”
  Lottaz pursues the thread: “The way I see it is that smaller neutral states can act as the grease in the machine that gets peace agreements or de-escalatory moves going, but it cannot be the push that overcomes the inertia. Do you see it the same way?” Ambassador Ruch answers in the affirmative: “Grease is a very good metaphor. Usually, I used to use the word, you know, [for] the liquid that you have in the articulation to make you able to function without pain. I think this is exactly the role that we should have. Obviously, the superpowers will keep their autonomy of decision, and there is no way we can really influence the decision-making process. But what we can try to do is to influence the communication and the connectivity between the various great powers.” •

¹ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZFtnNXZA-6c 
² Ruch, Jean-Daniel. Crimes, Hate and Tremors – From one Cold War to the Other, in Pursuit of Peace and Justice, 2024, ISBN 979-8-3273-7668-7
³ see Security Switzerland. Situation report of the Federal Intelligence Service 2024, p. 12