Opinion | Switzerland’s neutrality is morally unjust

Swiss+President+Ignazio+Cassis+delivers+a+speech+at+the+opening+of+a+session+of+the+UN+Human+Rights+Council+on+Feb.+28.+Columnist+Sanchita+Teeka+argues+that+Switzerlands+neutrality+towards+world+conflicts+is+unreasonable.+

Photo courtesy of Fabrice Coffrini/AFP/Getty Images/TNS

Swiss President Ignazio Cassis delivers a speech at the opening of a session of the UN Human Rights Council on Feb. 28. Columnist Sanchita Teeka argues that Switzerland’s neutrality towards world conflicts is unreasonable.

By Sanchita Teeka, Columnist

The famously neutral Switzerland made the unexpected move to impose sanctions on Russia and Vladimir Putin in response to the invasion of Ukraine. This historical decision to take a stance and effectively break neutrality has since been praised by the media for what really is the absolute bare minimum.

Throughout history, Switzerland has claimed to be neutral in conflict, however, this stance never actually embodies neutrality.

While Switzerland kept a status of neutrality in World War II, it was later uncovered that Switzerland was allowing Nazi aircraft to fly in their airspace and storing Nazi gold and other items they looted from invasions. This passive accommodation ultimately aided Nazi Germany in the war effort. At the same time, Switzerland was accepting Jewish capital to store but was denying sanctuary.

The reality is that Switzerland acted in their own self-interest under a facade of neutrality — even if that meant making money off of genocide. 

This stance persists because of the immense economic gain they receive regardless of these sided acts. Because of their neutral status, Switzerland was also able to continue trade with the British and did around 1.8 million British pounds of business by 1944. 

Get The Daily Illini in your inbox!

  • Catch the latest on University of Illinois news, sports, and more. Delivered every weekday.
  • Stay up to date on all things Illini sports. Delivered every Monday.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Thank you for subscribing!

Since then, Switzerland has maintained its neutral status and continues to allow injustice to occur. Being a bystander in a situation where there is a clear oppressor is taking the side of the oppressor. Being neutral is making a silent statement that there isn’t anything worth intervening in.

Today, Switzerland continues to benefit from its neutral status especially economically. By refusing to join NATO or the European Union, they have no responsibility to fight for other nations should a conflict arise. Thus, they save immensely on their military budget by maintaining an army solely for defensive purposes.

While there is clear political and economic gain to come from maintaining this neutral stance, it comes at the cost of morality. 

Switzerland only sanctioned Russia once it was clear that they wouldn’t be making any other enemies when everyone came to Ukraine’s aid. Plus, 20,000 of its citizens went to the streets to press the government to support the EU sanctions and take a stance. At this point, even the Taliban had called for “restraint on both sides.” For Switzerland to remain neutral would have been a national embarrassment.

It isn’t incredible that Switzerland broke neutrality, and we need to stop acting like it is. There is nothing special or brave about taking a stance that everyone agrees with or standing up to oppression: It should be the default.

Sanchita is a freshman in LAS.

[email protected]