The Neutrality Initiative – Striding towards a referendum
by Dr. iur. Marianne Wüthrich
During the 2026 spring session, the Neutrality Initiative was rushed through the parliamentary conciliation process in an unusually expedited procedure – presumably to limit the time available to the initiators for preparing the referendum. In their haste, the parliamentarians apparently had little time to think, and the results reflected this. It is precisely to avoid this that the National Council and the Council of States usually resolve their differences from one session to the next, thereby allowing themselves three months until the next debate. At the end of the frantic back-and-forth, the substantial text of the initiative was whittled down to a counter-proposal consisting of a single sentence, and ultimately both the initiative and the counter-proposal were rejected by a majority in both chambers. We can be glad that Parliament can only issue a voting recommendation on a popular initiative. The final say lies with the people and the cantons. The referendum will take place this autumn.
As a reminder: on 19 June 2025, the Council of States held an intensive three-hour session to discuss the initiative, during which a number of councillors from various parties made a strong commitment to Swiss neutrality. Ultimately, the Council of States rejected the initiative by 33 votes to 9, but approved a direct counter-proposal very clearly by 27 votes to 15 (with 1 abstention).1 In doing so, it sought to enshrine neutrality as a principle in the Federal Constitution, although key elements of the initiative’s text – concerning the very core issues of Swiss neutrality – would be omitted.
Text of the initiative
Art. 54a Swiss neutrality
1 Switzerland is neutral. Its neutrality is perpetual and armed.
2 Switzerland does not join any military or defence alliances. The exception is the cooperation with these alliances in the event of a direct military attack on Switzerland or of preparations for an attack of this kind.
3 Switzerland does not take part in military conflicts between third countries and does not impose non-military sanctions on warring states. The exceptions are obligations to the United Nations (UN) and measures to prevent the circumvention of non-military sanctions by other states.
4 Switzerland makes use of its permanent neutrality to prevent and resolve conflicts. It acts as a mediator.
Counter-proposal of the Council of States of 19 June 2025
Art. 54a Swiss neutrality
1 Switzerland is neutral. Its neutrality is perpetual and armed.
2 the Confederation uses its neutrality to safeguard Switzerland’s independence and security, to prevent conflicts or to help resolve them. It acts as a mediator.
A tug-of-war in the spring session
On 5 March, the National Council – despite 86 speakers taking the floor, though with far less depth of discussion than in the Council of States – clearly rejected both the initiative and a direct counter-proposal. On 12 March, the Council of States decided by a very narrow margin of 21 votes to 21, with the President of the Council of States casting the deciding vote, to stand by its counter-proposal. On 17 March, the National Council stood by its rejection of both the initiative and the counter-proposal.
On 18 March, the Council of States deleted the second paragraph of its counter-proposal, reducing it to a single sentence: “Switzerland is neutral. Its neutrality is perpetual and armed.” This was done solely to persuade the National Council to back down. A tragedy! But even this minimalist version went too far for Federal Councillor Ignazio Cassis: “The Federal Council remains convinced that the current concept of neutrality, with the existing scope for action, is the best way to safeguard Switzerland’s interests. It therefore remains convinced that neither the adoption of the neutrality initiative nor the counter-proposal before us today would be in Switzerland’s interests.”
Also on 18 March, the National Council stood by its rejection of even the minimal version of a counter-proposal. On 19 March, the Conciliation Committee (see box) narrowly rejected a counter-proposal by 14 votes to 12. The majority of the Conciliation Committee ultimately proposed: “The Federal Assembly recommends that the people and the cantons reject the initiative.” A minority of eight conference members (not only from the SVP) unsuccessfully called for the motion to be rejected, meaning that Parliament would not have been allowed to issue a voting recommendation. On the same day, both chambers approved the Conciliation Conference’s motion. As mentioned, there was no time to give thorough consideration to what is best for Switzerland.
Credibility as a neutral country in the world
Any Swiss citizen with eyes to see and ears to hear can see for themselves how the Federal Council “safeguards Switzerland’s interests” – or rather, abuses its “scope for action”! Through the Swiss Army’s participation in NATO alliance exercises, the transit of foreign troops and aerial refuelling in Swiss airspace, the authorisation of arms exports to a select group of states and export controls or bans for the “rest of the world”, with sanctions against states and individuals – including the freezing of their funds in Swiss bank accounts – that violate the law of neutrality and international law. With this outrageous and un-Swiss foreign policy, the Federal Council may well be safeguarding the interests of the major Western powers and their corporations, but it is certainly not safeguarding the interests of the Swiss people. It also continues to damage Switzerland’s credibility in the world as a neutral country that fulfils its self-imposed and widely respected obligations towards people and nations.
The Swiss people will decide on our country’s neutrality
The Neutrality Initiative aims to stop the Federal Government in Bern from abandoning the principle of neutrality, which is of vital importance to our country. To this end, the fundamental criteria of Swiss neutrality are to be enshrined in the Constitution. The initiators have not reinvented these criteria; until a few years ago, they were clear to every Swiss citizen. The fact that our security is best protected when we stay out of foreign wars and military alliances is not a “myth of Marignano”, but a lesson learned from experience, even in recent times. It is equally clear that adopting sanctions imposed by foreign powers against third countries renders our country unfit to act as a credible mediator.
Now, this autumn, the Swiss people will decide on this fundamental question without being distracted by a toothless counter-proposal: do we wish to uphold neutrality and thereby preserve the core of Switzerland’s identity and its credibility abroad, or do we bow to pressure from foreign powers to abandon Switzerland’s path and submit to their command? •
1 Current Concerns No. 13 of 17 June 2025; https://www.zeit-fragen.ch/en/archives/2025/nr-13-10-juni-2025/sommersession-2025-neutralitaetsinitiative-im-staenderat
Conciliation Committee
mw. Art. 91 of the Parliament Act (ParlG) states:
1 If there are still differences following three detailed discussions in each council, a conciliation committee shall be appointed. This committee is responsible for seeking a compromise solution.
2 The preliminary consultation committees [here the Foreign Affairs Committees (FAC), mw] shall each contribute 13 members to the conciliation committee. [...] The composition of the delegations from each committee is governed by Article 43 paragraph 3*.
3 The committee president of the first council [here the Council of States] shall chair the conciliation committee. […]
* Art. 43 para. 3 ParlG: The composition of the committees and the allocation of seats among the committee chairpersons are determined by the strengths of the parliamentary groups in the relevant council. Wherever possible, appropriate account should be taken of the official languages and regions of the country.
Neutrality is the backbone of Switzerland
Hans-Peter Portmann (FDP, ZH) in the National Council on 5 March 2026: “If the Swiss people reject this initiative and are not presented with an alternative proposal, this will be interpreted abroad as a message that Switzerland no longer stands behind neutrality. […] People abroad will read headlines in their media stating that Switzerland no longer has neutrality, that Switzerland has abandoned neutrality.” Question from a fellow councillor: “If this Council does not consider the counter-proposal, which is to be expected: will you then vote yes to the initiative, or will you vote no to the initiative?” Portmann’s reply: “[…] Yes, having weighed up the pros and cons, I personally have strong sympathies for supporting this neutrality initiative if there is no counter-proposal.”
* * *
mw. He did not find the courage, and with him a number of Council of States members from various parties and many National Council members from the centrist group, who had advocated for a counter-proposal not merely for tactical reasons, but whose votes revealed a genuine desire to preserve Switzerland’s neutrality. How can seasoned Swiss parliamentarians allow themselves to be deterred by propaganda (“the Blocher initiative”) from supporting the neutrality initiative? In Switzerland, a country of direct democracy, every citizen has a vote. The fact that Christoph Blocher is in favour of neutrality surely cannot be a reason to reject the initiative.
Daniel Jositsch (SP, ZH) in the Council of States on 12 March 2026: “To summarise, the conclusion and stance of the committee rapporteur – and apparently of the majority – is: “We want to be neutral, except in war.” That makes about as much sense as lending someone an umbrella whenever it isn’t raining. For that reason, I believe we must say something – namely, define what neutrality is.”
Marco Chiesa (SVP, TI) in the Council of States on 19 March 2026: “Switzerland is neutral; its neutrality is perpetual and armed. This means that what has been a firm principle for generations is now increasingly being called into question. What was once virtually set in stone is being increasingly eroded. But neutrality is a principle that cannot be bent or stretched at will. It must not be adapted to changing circumstances on a whim. Neutrality is the backbone of Switzerland, and when a country begins to doubt its own values, that is more than worrying. It is a warning sign.”