Secret document revealed: this is how Cassis wanted to change Swiss neutrality

The seven main western states, the G7, want to compete against Switzerland. The newspaper reported on Saturday. In particular, the US, Canada, Britain, France, Germany, Japan and Italy have questions about the federal government’s supposedly hesitant sanctions policy, the blockade of Swiss-made armaments and how to deal with the billions of Russian oligarchs in Swiss banks . It is an uncomfortable development for Switzerland.

But it comes as no surprise. This is evident from a look at the secret report that Minister of Foreign Affairs Ignazio Cassis presented to the Federal Council in September – with which he wanted to realign neutrality policy under the slogan “cooperative neutrality”. The newspaper of August 31, 2022 is available for this newspaper. It’s brutally direct.

The first part states: “Partner states have difficulty understanding the meaning and purpose of a neutral position (…) when, as in the case of Russia’s military aggression against Ukraine, it is a direct attack on the liberal value system. and the international order acts.” And in the last part:

The resignation of the Federal Council in 1993

Cassis had already publicly promoted his idea in the weeks leading up to the Federal Council meeting. A draft of the report also reached the media through leaks. That should have provoked defensive reflexes in the administrative body: the Bundesrat rejected Cassis’s concept.

The existing definition of neutrality policy from 1993 remains valid, he announced on September 7. A position he has maintained ever since: prompted by initiatives and sometimes unsolicited, the Federal Council reiterated that it had no intention of deviating from the status quo, which left the federal government with “sufficient room for maneuver” in terms of neutrality policies.

This is also stated in an adapted and abridged version of the report that was published by the Federal Council in October. Cassis paper, on the other hand, disappeared into the drawers.

But the government’s withdrawal in 1993 did not put an end to the debate. On the contrary, according to an unusually sharp interview by the US ambassador in Bern recently in the NZZ and now the activities of the G7. Discussions are also going in circles in parliament. The National Council’s Security Committee has just approved the delivery of decommissioned Leopard tanks to Germany, but the question is whether the sister committee of the Council of States will follow suit.

It is therefore worth taking a closer look at Cassis’ report, which the Federal Council rejected in September. Even then, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs wrote about critical voices from the EU, the US and the UK under the keyword “external perception”:

And further: “Neutrality is sometimes seen as an excuse to remain passive and indifferent to international challenges and (…) to advance economic interests.”

The EU, US and Britain perceive neutrality “less positively than is often assumed in Switzerland,” a statement said. Yes:

From an Anglo-Saxon perspective, the world is increasingly divided into two camps: free, democratic countries versus authoritarian regimes.

Independence and security «only together with others»

Against this background, the report discusses “Options for adapting a concept of neutrality”. The focus is on comparing the status quo with the cooperative neutrality that Cassis strives for.

According to the report, the 1993 concept of neutrality has essentially proven its worth: Over the past 30 years, Switzerland has “protected and upheld its interests and values” and “contributed to a secure and peaceful world order.” However, this status quo was developed on the assumption “that the days of political blocs are over and that collective security can be protected by a functioning UN Security Council (…)”.

But now geopolitical shifts, the destabilization of European security and technological developments have shown “that the premise has changed and the current understanding of neutrality needs to be updated”. In the status quo, cooperation with value partners is “only possible to a limited extent”.

However, Switzerland’s contribution to security in Europe and thus to its own security can be expanded “also within the framework of the neutrality law” – with “cooperative neutrality”. This is based on the premise that “in today’s world, the independence and security of Switzerland can only be achieved together with others”. The law of neutrality is observed, but “interpreted in favor of cooperation” where possible.

For example, in the case of arms exports: “The export of war material to warring parties remains prohibited,” the report said. But “the freedom of action in terms of neutrality policies is used as much as possible in favor of security policy cooperation with countries that share Switzerland’s values”. In this way, non-re-export declarations from partners can be omitted.

Cooperative neutrality would be “a further development of the status quo”. Among other things, it would allow “closer security cooperation with the EU and NATO” to protect international order. Cassis’ preference for this variant is clear – but he could not assert himself in the Bundesrat.

19th century: rejection of integral neutrality

In addition to other variants, integral neutrality is also discussed – the option that the SVP is pursuing with its neutrality initiative. It comes across badly in the report: it’s about “a kind of original understanding of neutrality that comes from the 19th century,” it says. The focus is on “sitting still”.

But even if the federal government were passive, it would be affected by conflicts like the one in Ukraine, as the report states:

Full neutrality is “not in Switzerland’s interest”. (aargauerzeitung.ch)