Switzerland votes ‘no’ to enshrining neutrality in the Constitution
The initiative was backed by the nationalist right and had gained momentum in the wake of the Confederation’s adoption of most of the EU’s sanctions against Russia
Swiss voters have rejected the initiative seeking to introduce a stricter definition of neutrality into the Swiss Constitution. With the count complete, the ‘no’ vote won with 70.2 per cent. There were many ‘no’ votes in the French-speaking cantons of Switzerland, whilst the ‘no’ vote was lower but still quite substantial in German-speaking Switzerland; opposition was more nuanced in the Italian-speaking canton of Ticino, where the ‘no’ vote won with 51 per cent.
The Swiss nationalist right, which supports the neutrality initiative, has thus suffered its second defeat in the space of a few months. Last June, its initiative calling for a cap of 10 million inhabitants in Switzerland – intended as a measure against immigration and the free movement of people with the European Union – was rejected. In June, in a vote where the outcome was very uncertain, the ‘no’ vote ultimately won by a clear margin, securing over 54 per cent. The victory of the ‘no’ vote in this other referendum – also significant but less uncertain – is decidedly more decisive.
The SVP (Swiss People’s Party, despite its position on the right) developed this latest initiative largely in the wake of Switzerland’s adoption of the majority of the sanctions imposed by the European Union against Russia following the latter’s invasion of Ukraine. True neutrality, according to the SVP, should not entail this sort of alignment. The rejected initiative essentially had two main points. The first was that Switzerland should, if anything, only join sanctions adopted by the UN, and no others. The second was that Switzerland should only cooperate with military alliances in the event of a direct attack on the country. The SVP regards Switzerland’s rapprochement with both the EU and NATO as dangerous.
The majorities in the Swiss Government and Parliament came out in favour of a ‘no’ vote. The main centre-left parties (Liberals and Christian Democrats) and left-wing parties (Socialists and Greens), albeit with differing emphases, all opposed the initiative. According to the ‘no’ camp, Switzerland had to, and must continue to, maintain its neutrality as it stands, with the ability to manage it in the most appropriate way in different situations; adhering only to sanctions decided by the UN, of which Switzerland is a member; for the ‘no’ supporters, this would mean relying solely on the UN, within which vetoes prevail in quite a few cases. Switzerland is a member of neither the EU nor NATO, but it has extensive bilateral agreements with the former and maintains contacts and dialogue with the latter. It cooperates on security matters with its neighbouring states; failing to do so would weaken its defence capabilities. The vote confirmed these positions.
The initiative known as ‘For Safe Food’ was also rejected. Once the count was complete, the ‘no’ vote won with 72.5 per cent. Its supporters wanted to significantly and immediately strengthen the supply of Swiss-produced foodstuffs and clean drinking water. The Government and Parliament came out in favour of a ‘no’ vote, pointing out that the protection of the environment and agriculture has long been a priority in Switzerland and describing the demand to raise the net self-sufficiency rate to 70 per cent within ten years as decidedly excessive (it currently stands at around 45 per cent, and the government in Bern estimates that it can only be raised to at least 50 per cent by 2050).
