DREAM / The Prime Minister resigns and wakes up under the Parisian bridge!

 Kliko këtu për të tjera
Voxpress:

2026-09-27 15:54:34Kosova&Bota SHKRUAR NGA REDAKSIA VOX

Today, Swiss citizens will answer a question that at first glance seems philosophical, but which could have concrete consequences for the country's foreign policy: What does it mean to be neutral today? Does it mean taking no position, or retaining the right to choose a side without entering a war?

In a world where international conflicts and clashes are making it increasingly difficult to stay on the sidelines, the Swiss must decide whether neutrality is a compass that guides foreign policy or an anchor that keeps the country tied to the past.

At the center of the referendum is the so-called "Neutrality Initiative," which calls for much stronger rules to be set out in the federal constitution.

If approved, Switzerland would not only have to stay out of wars, but would also not be able to join or cooperate with military alliances, nor impose economic sanctions on countries in conflict.

Sanctions have become the most contentious issue. Currently, the Swiss government has the right to impose punitive measures on other states and has done so, including sanctions on Russia after its invasion of Ukraine.

The initiative would significantly limit this scope for action. Switzerland is not part of the European Union, but is closely linked to it economically and politically.

After the war in Ukraine began, the Swiss government decided to implement most of the EU sanctions against Moscow. According to researcher Daniel Mockli, refusing them would have risked the country's political and economic isolation in Europe.

Supporters of the initiative, meanwhile, argue that sanctions and arms export policies have moved Switzerland away from traditional neutrality.

Christoph Blocher, one of the leading figures of the Swiss People's Party, has stated that neutrality is precisely what protects the country from war.

Along the same lines, former MP Walter Wobmann argues that Switzerland cannot be "semi-neutral": it either stays completely out of alliances and conflicts, or accepts another international role.

However, opponents of the initiative, among them the government, parliament and most of the main parties, say that neutrality should not mean passivity in the face of violations of international law.

Historian Marco Jorio recalls that Switzerland has participated in sanctions regimes before, including measures against Mussolini's Italy in 1935 and against the Soviet Union during the Cold War.

The debate also touches on a broader issue: can military neutrality be separated from economic and political neutrality? Möckli argues that neutrality does not necessarily require indifference to law and values.

While Lisa Marchon, co-director of the organization Operation Libero, emphasizes that neutrality cannot be used as an excuse to remain passive in the face of injustice.

The debate is particularly important at a time when threats are no longer limited to traditional wars between states. Cyberattacks, hybrid sabotage, and long-range weapons easily cross borders.

For a small country like Switzerland, the question remains how it can maintain its independence without becoming isolated. Today, the Swiss will provide their answer.


Në përputhje me standarded JTI

Video

SHIKO KANALIN NE YOUTUBE
×