A referendum on 27 September will force Swiss voters to decide whether the country’s historic neutrality should prevent it from imposing economic sanctions on countries at war, a proposal backed by the populist right and openly supported by Moscow.
Switzerland’s long-standing policy of neutrality, internationally recognised since 1815, is being tested against the realities of the war in Ukraine. Voters will decide whether to add a specific provision on neutrality to the Constitution that would, in practice, make one significant change to current policy: Switzerland would no longer be able to impose economic sanctions on countries at war unless those measures were approved by the United Nations.
Russia stands to be the principal beneficiary. Moscow has already intervened in the campaign, seeing the proposal as a potential route for Switzerland to withdraw the European Union sanctions it adopted following Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022.
The Swiss Government justified those sanctions as necessary because Moscow had flagrantly violated international law, the same body of law that protects Switzerland’s neutral status. “The defence of peace and security and respect for international law are values that Switzerland, as a democratic country, shares and defends together with its European neighbours,” the Government said when it adopted the measures.
Bern continues to maintain an arms embargo on both sides of the conflict and prohibits the transfer of military material through sales to third parties. At the same time, Switzerland has joined European efforts to protect Ukrainians fleeing the war and has received around 70,000 people.
For Christoph Blocher, the 85-year-old patriarch of Switzerland’s populist right and a former member of the Federal Executive, the sanctions against Russia violate Swiss neutrality and expose the country to danger by making it a “belligerent party”. The Kremlin has repeatedly echoed that argument. In a lengthy statement in early August, Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman María Zajárova declared that Switzerland “de facto is no longer a neutral country” and openly campaigned in support of the proposal.
Blocher, although no longer at the forefront of the Swiss People’s Party (SVP/UDC), which he helped turn into the country’s largest party through an anti-EU and anti-immigration platform, has personally driven the campaign for what he describes as strict neutrality. He began collecting signatures for the referendum shortly after Switzerland approved the sanctions against Russia. The nationalist organisation Pro Switzerland, partly composed of SVP members, has also backed the initiative.
Yet the campaign appears to be struggling to win public support. A June poll by the Leewas Institute for Tages-Anzeiger and 20 Minuten found that 54% opposed changing the country’s neutrality policy, while 34% supported the proposal and 12% were undecided. A second survey published on 19 August showed the gap widening: 62% opposed the initiative, 30% supported it and 6% did not answer.
The figures suggest that the referendum is less a vote on neutrality itself than on what neutrality should mean in practice. Between 76% and 80% of Swiss people generally support neutrality. But a January study by the Sotomo Institute found broad support for a more pragmatic interpretation. Some 75% backed sanctions against countries such as Russia that violate international law, while 83% supported cooperation with other countries to strengthen Switzerland’s security. Even 56% would accept sending ammunition or anti-drone defences to Ukraine.
Political parties outside the SVP have largely united against the proposal. The Social Democrats have called it a “pro-Putin initiative”, while the Greens argue that lifting sanctions would allow the Russian regime to replenish its finances for its “brutal war of aggression”. The Liberals say the proposal would prevent Switzerland from acting “with flexibility and in the interests of its own security” as threats from Russia, Iran and China increase.
The Federal Council, Switzerland’s collective government, also recommends a no vote. It argues that neutrality is already embedded in the Constitution and allows Switzerland to protect its security and independence while serving as a mediator and host for peace talks.
Switzerland is not part of any military alliance, although it participates in NATO training and defence and security programmes. The Government warns that adopting the proposal would restrict such military cooperation to circumstances in which Switzerland itself was preparing for or experiencing an attack, potentially weakening its defensive capacity.
For the Government, economic sanctions remain compatible with neutrality because they provide a means of responding to violations of international law. Switzerland assesses European Union sanctions case by case and may adopt them fully, partially or not at all, according to foreign-policy, economic and legal considerations.
A flexible form of neutrality is considered important by 68% of respondents in the Sotomo survey. Foreign Minister Ignazio Cassis argues that Switzerland’s ability to respond appropriately to new challenges has itself strengthened the country’s neutrality.
Blocher remains unmoved. “We do not take the side of the aggressor, but neither do we take the side of his opponents,” he told voters.
On 27 September, Switzerland will decide whether that definition of neutrality still fits a Europe transformed by war.
