“Convincing people with arguments!”

pk. The press conference held to present the recently formed movement “Committee for Integral Neutrality” endorsed this guiding principle. It was well attended, even though it was ignored by the self-styled quality media. The meeting was chaired by Dr Albert Stähli, the founder of the newly formed movement “Committee for Integral Neutrality”. At the time of the press conference in Zurich, the movement already had over 1,600 members, all of whom were proven, competent business leaders, as Stähli emphasised in his opening remarks. Dr Albert Stähli himself is the founder and former principal of the internationally renowned Zurich business training school GSBA/Oekreal. His lifelong commitment has been, and remains, to sound business management, including an examination of what has historically proven successful and what has not. He has published numerous studies on this subject in book form. As Stähli said, the credo of the ‘Yes’ campaign is as simple as it is convincing: “Neutrality is too important to be left to politicians.” He then went on to say: “For, according to the Constitution, it is the sovereign who defines the interpretation of our neutrality, not the Federal Council. With its unprofessional, erratic course and the shameful “muddling through” – as Federal Councillor Cassis put it with disarming candour – it has manoeuvred our country into a dangerous situation and assumed a role to which it is not entitled. This state of affairs, with its catastrophic consequences, must be rectified.”
    Stähli sees a ‘yes’ vote on the neutrality initiative on the last weekend in September as a decisive step in that direction. Put bluntly, the main question at stake is as follows: “Are we setting a course towards war or towards peace? If we align ourselves with blocs of power, we automatically become enemies [of the opposing camp, pk.]. If, on the other hand, we remain true to our national DNA and uphold a strictly integral, armed and permanent neutrality, we can steer our unique country safely through turbulent times. Furthermore, this enables us, in a crucial way, to continue to fulfil our humanitarian role as mediators offering our good offices between warring parties and as the home of the ICRC.”

Looking for help with blocks?

This crucial point was also emphasised by short-term consultant Dr René Roca, founder and director of the Swiss Research Institute for Direct Democracy, who, at the express request of the host organisation, has taken on its presidency, “willingly and out of conviction for the cause”, as he explained. Roca pointed out that Switzerland has been moving ever closer to NATO in recent years. Today, members of the Swiss Armed Forces regularly take part in NATO military exercises, far from the country they are constitutionally bound to defend – our country, not NATO. Furthermore, NATO has changed significantly since the collapse of the Soviet Union. Under pressure from the US, it has become heavily dependent on the US in terms of its doctrine and armaments. Today, it leads the ranks of those forces that are openly preparing for the next major war against Russia.
    Furthermore, NATO – in breach of its word of honour – has moved menacingly close to the Russian border, deploying weapons systems directed primarily against Russia (keyword: eastward expansion). An alliance with NATO is an alliance with the US. And the US has long been waging a war – at times open, at other times covert – against what it describes as its main enemy: Russia. Given this threatening backdrop, which country would not also feel under threat? And what about Switzerland? If it seeks refuge in NATO, it will become an auxiliary force of the US. Furthermore, aligning itself with a bloc that is active in power politics prevents Switzerland from providing any real assistance in resolving conflicts. Switzerland, formerly a reliably neutral nation, had taken on the role of guaranteeing the necessary diplomatic contacts between Iran and the US. But its adoption of the EU sanctions against Iran has, in the eyes of the non-Western world, made it a party to a ruthlessly waged war. It can stir the pot as much as it likes at the Bürgenstock, but one of the key participants – the Russian Federation – has cancelled its attendance: for Russia, Switzerland features on the list of unfriendly states. Something similar – though even more disastrous – is happening with the Red Cross. The fact that Switzerland allows the US to dictate its international conduct also drastically undermines the Red Cross’s effectiveness. The paper, which Roca co-authored with Hans Bieri (Swiss Association for Agriculture and Industry, SVIL), co-chair of the Round Table for Promoting a ‘Yes’ Vote on the Neutrality Initiative (and which, like René Roca’s paper, was included in the press conference documents), states the following on this subject: “Switzerland must remain free from slavish alliance obligations and vassalage. […] Swiss neutrality is a political mandate for Switzerland that transcends all political parties. The people’s need for peace must take precedence over political power struggles. […] Those who have so far put forward the narrative of the ‘SVP’ or ‘Putin initiative’ are thereby sidestepping the discussion on the causes of the increasing conflicts. In doing so, they are accepting – whether consciously or out of resignation – the ongoing process of disempowering the Swiss sovereign [the electorate, pk.].”¹

Every vote counts

During the lively discussion, Stähli emphasised that the Swiss economy, in particular, must have an interest in ensuring that Switzerland’s policy of neutrality returns to a course that presents the country as politically credible, stable and predictable, including in the eyes of the international community. Muddling through (Cassis!), siding first with one power bloc and then with another, does no favours to either human or economic interests. Unpredictability fuels uncertainty, uncertainty fuels emotions, and these in turn lead to knee-jerk reactions. This is not a foundation on which a thriving, outward-looking economy can flourish.
    A ‘yes’ to integral neutrality is in everyone’s interests, above all those of the population, both here and elsewhere in this one and indivisible world.
    Given the significance of the forthcoming vote, one can only wish the courageous committee every success and hope that many within their ranks will, for sound reasons, commit to a firm ‘yes’ and continue to campaign for it amongst their friends and family. It may well be that those who make up their minds at the last minute will tip the balance. •

¹ The two background papers on the referendum (Roca, René. “Die Schweizer Neutralität – eine Friedensprojekt erster Güte” (Swiss neutrality – a peace project of the highest order); Bieri, Hans/Roca, René. “Die Neutralität als Errungenschaft der Aufklärung” (Neutrality as an Achievement of the Enlightenment) can be ordered from Hans Bieri (hans.bieri@svil.ch). An abridged version of Dr René Roca’s text was published in the Neue Zürcher Zeitung on 30 April 2026.