Neutrality weapons

Switzerland has not been able to decide for the supply of weapons to Ukraine for more than a year and is delayed with the Western sanctions. We figure out whether it can change

More than two centuries officially (and in practice are all five) Switzerland retains neutrality in military conflicts. However, for more than a year, since the beginning of the war in Ukraine, the position of Switzerland has been tested - both from the outside and from the inside. Adhering to neutrality, the country, in fact, blocks part of the supplies of weapons to Kyiv by other European countries and does nothing itself, and also delayed to join economic sanctions, making it possible to have time to get Russian assets from the country and thereby avoid their freezing.

Especially for Novo-Europe, Ksenia Yakhno talked with Swiss experts and tried to figure out whether the age-old tradition of neutrality really prevents Switzerland from fully joining the ranks of countries trying to stop Russian aggression? Or is neutrality it is used only as an excuse in order to save in Swiss banks related to Russia and once again not to annoy Moscow with supplies of weapons to Kyiv?

According to the Kil Institute of World Economics, over the year since the beginning of the war, 40 countries provided assistance to Ukraine. In the first place of the rating are the United States that provided financial, humanitarian and military assistance to Kyiv in the amount of 73.18 billion euros. Among the European countries, the largest support - in the amount of 4.89 billion euros - was provided by the UK, and among the EU countries - Germany, whose contribution is estimated at 2.36 billion euros. Switzerland takes 22nd place in this rating, but, as noted at the institute, it did not supply military assistance-only humanitarian (180 million euros) and financial (60 million euros).

Despite the fact that the war in Ukraine, according to the OECR, has become the largest military conflict in the world since the Second World War, Switzerland and in this conflict continues to observe neutrality, which has been officially lasting more than two centuries. In an interview with NZZ AM Sonntag, President Alena Bersse outlined the country's position regarding the supply of weapons to Ukraine unambiguously: “Swiss weapons should not be used in wars. Swiss neutrality is obliged to preserve all its central elements, in particular, commitment to humanitarian law and human rights. ”

In a sense, Denmark was neutral to the full -scale invasion of Russia in Ukraine, which at that time had not participated in the discussion of the EU defense for about thirty years. However, in March 2022, its authorities announced and held a referendum on June 1, during which the residents of the country answered the question: “Do you vote or against the participation of Denmark in European cooperation in the field of security and defense by canceling the exclusion from participating in the EU defense?” Most of the voted abolition supported. This allowed Denmark to make decisions on military assistance to Ukraine not only independently, but also within the framework of the European Union.

Switzerland, however, decided not to review the position, and therefore faced serious pressure from other countries, primarily the United States. On March 16, the US Ambassador to Berna Scott Miller said in an interview with Neue Zürcher Zeitung that the United States respect Switzerland’s neutral position in wars, but “Switzerland cannot call itself neutral and allow one or both sides [War in Ukraine. “Ed.] Use its laws in their interests.” Miller believes that the current situation is beneficial to Russia, which "now violates all the basic principles of international law."

“Switzerland is in the most serious crisis since the Second World War. She again faced the question of what her neutrality now means ",

- the ambassador is sure.

Indeed, the debates have been going on the whole year inside Switzerland - about the actions permissible for a neutral country both in relation to military assistance and in relation to sanctions. Can Switzerland re -export weapons to Ukraine, or at least not interfere with other countries in supplies if the weapon was produced in Switzerland? And what to do with the minerally Russian assets in the country, whose banking system traditionally has a reputation as the most reliable and not subject to political games?

Trading neutrality

Switzerland was officially recognized by the international community with a neutral state in 1815, when the Vienna Congress passed. The authors of the Constitution of 1848 noted that neutrality helps to maintain the sovereignty of the country.

According to BBC, a professor of political science at the University of Basel and the director of the research institute Laurent Ghetshel, before becoming neutral, Switzerland widely provided the services of mercenaries for economic considerations. “The old Swiss Confederation was a very poor country - its territory was unsuitable for large -scale agriculture, it did not have access to the sea, overseas colonies with their resources, so mercenaries became just a source of income,” he explains.

During the XVII-XVIII centuries, the Swiss mercenaries participated in wars on the side of a wide different countries, so in the event of a military conflict of Switzerland it would be even difficult to support one of one. This led to the fact that in 1815 the Swiss decided to officially become a neutral country and refuse to participate in any war.

Laurent Ghetshel in a commentary for Novo-Europe adds that the neutrality of Switzerland has also become part of a major European transaction, as a result of which the country received new territories-cantons of Vale, nonsense (at the same time becoming Principal Principality) and Geneva, who were previously under the control of France.

In 1907, the Hague Conventions described the rights and obligations of states adhering to the neutrality, and Switzerland signed this document. According to him, neutral states are obliged to refuse to participate in any wars and the provision of weapons of any of the warring parties.

Irresistible laws

In itself, neutrality is not determined in any tight manner in the legislation of Switzerland. “This is the totality of all measures that a neutral state takes on its own initiative to ensure clarity and persuasiveness of its constant neutrality,” the Switzerland website says. “In Switzerland, there is no neutrality legislation, but there is legislation on the export of weapons,” Robert Kolb, professor of Geneva University, said in a commentary to Novo-Europe.

The export of weapons in Switzerland is regulated by the Federal Law “On Military Property”. According to him, we need a license, as well as a declaration of non -export for the export of weapons. Re -export means the export of goods from the country that had previously been imported into it from other states. The declaration of rejection of the re -export can be canceled in relation to weapons components, “if it is established that, having been abroad, they will be integrated into the product and are not re -exported unchanged”, as well as their value in relation to the finished military equipment “negligible”.

The same law also states the fulfillment by Switzerland of international obligations, one of which is just the observance of neutrality during military conflicts. Clause B of Article 22 directly prohibits the sending of weapons to the warring countries.

Referring to neutrality, the confederation has already rejected the requests of Germany, Spain, Denmark and the Netherlands on the supply of weapons produced in Switzerland. Also in December last year, Bern banned Germany to export anti -aircraft shells for Gepard tanks to Ukraine, which Switzerland sold Berlin several decades ago.

But the professor of retired Bernean University Thomas Cottier believes that the situation is not so unambiguous:

“Swiss legislation strictly prohibits sending weapons to Ukraine. Whether this applies to Ukraine, weapons [produced in Switzerland], previously sold to NATO members, is a controversial issue. ”

Some Swiss politicians also advocate resolving the re -export of weapons in exceptional cases.

In particular, the leader of the Free Democratic Party adheres to this position. Liberals "Thierry Burkart. “We are neutral and remain like that, but in the current situation we actually prevent our Western partners from supporting Ukraine,” Politico cites his words . The Bukant party is the third largest in the National Council (the Great Chamber of the Switzerland Parliament) and takes 29 seats out of 200. Burkart himself submitted a proposal to European countries to supply weapons produced in Switzerland to Ukraine to the Council of Cantons (Malaya Chamber of Parliament). The advice was rejected by the advice: 23 members voted against, 18 - for, 2 - abstained.

At the same time, in March, the National Council adopted an amendment allowing the countries that buy Swiss weapons to re -export it in an attack by the country. However, de facto amendment did not change anything, because to resolve re-export, the condition should be fulfilled: sending weapons is possible if the UN Security Council accepts a resolution that one of the parties to the conflict is guilty of violation of international law, and its victim has the right to defense. This condition in practice is impossible, because Russia has a permanent place in the UN Security Council and the right of the veto, with which it blocks any attempt to condemn its attack on Ukraine.

According to the university professor Bern and a specialist in the field of European security policy Fabio Wasserfallen: “The government confirmed its unwillingness in this regard [to discuss indirect military assistance to Ukraine. - Ed.]. In parliament, several effort tried to find a solution, but in the end it was unsuccessful. On the issue of such supplies, there may be a space for specific agreements, but it is apparently very limited. ”

Fathed off

The way out of this situation, according to Professor Geneva University, Robert Sobba, must be sought in the current legislation, which in fact allows us to issue permits for re -export. In his opinion, the export and re -export of weapons are different things, and therefore the Swiss neutrality should not apply to the latter.

Moreover, if the weapon was produced in another country, and Switzerland acquired it some time ago, you can turn to the 2006 rule, according to which foreign weapons, which no longer need the army, must be resold in priority priority producing “without conditions”, including without a ban on export and re-export.

However, despite the ongoing debates regarding re -export and the existence of the rule of 2006, in March 2023, Switzerland disposed of Rapier anti -aircraft missiles produced in the UK that could be transferred to Ukraine. As NZZ Am Sonntag wrote , the arsenal was somewhat outdated, but quite working. The fact that the weapons still functioned and could well have been used was confirmed by the ex-head of the newspaper Allgemeine Schweizerische Militaerzeitschrift Peter Schneider: “The missiles are old but not completely disabled. They could be used very well against low -flying goals, such as drones, fighters or helicopters. ”

Switzerland acquired 60 units of these weapons in 1980 and modernized several times. At the end of 2022, anti -aircraft missiles were disabled and recognized as unsuitable. “It is absurd that we will dispose of defensive weapons in Switzerland,” said Francois Pointe, a member of the National Council. He is sure that Rapier - the weapon of British, not Swiss production - does not fall under the law on the ban on the export of Swiss military equipment in the conflict zones.

According to NZZ Am Sonntag, Switzerland did not transmit Rapier Great Britain, as the 2006 rule suggested, since she did not receive the corresponding request from London and did not propose to conclude an appropriate agreement to the Britain authorities.

However, Rapier is not the only weapon that fell in Switzerland for write -off, despite the fact that it is still in working condition. In the coming years, the Confederation Army will decide some other foreign weapons systems, including 248 M113 infantry tanks and more than 100 M109 artillery guns.

Sanctions with a delay

However, the position of Switzerland after the start of a full-scale invasion of Ukraine is criticized not only on the issue of weapons, but also because of the country's specific policy on sanctions against Russia.

Since the beginning of the Russian invasion of Ukraine, Switzerland has joined a number of sanctions imposed by the EU, but each time introduced restrictions later. For example, the eighth package of sanctions of the European Union was approved on October 6, while Switzerland joined it only on November 23. In March 2022, the expert in the fight against corruption Mark Pit told Reuters that he knew at least one case when Switzerland imposed sanctions against the Russian oligarch a week later than the EU and he managed to sell his assets in the country during this time. “Either this is a manifestation of incompetence, or they [the authorities of Switzerland. “Ed.] They wanted to allow these Russian [assets] from the country,” Pit believes.

The US Ambassador to Bern, pointing to the ambiguity of the neutrality of Switzerland, which plays into the hands of Russia, also noticed that Switzerland imposes sanctions against Russia slower than the EU and the United States. “The sanctions are only as much as the political will behind them is strong. We must find as many assets as possible, freeze them and, if necessary, confiscate to provide them to Ukraine for the purpose of post -war recovery, ”said Scott Miller.

According to the co-founder of the OCCRP Paul Radu project, Switzerland "turned into a huge safe storage of assets of Russian oligarchs." He noted that their assets, "looted by ordinary people, are located on accounts, in bank cells, they are invested in real estate and works of art."

Over the past ten years, the so -called Russian desks have appeared in Switzerland with many banks - departments that specialize in working with clients from Russia, the publication Swissinfo writes . Also in the country there are lawyers, trusting managers and other specialists who work exclusively with Russians. At the same time, financial consultants and lawyers are not obliged to inform the authorities about dubious operations, which subsequently may be related to money laundering.

In April, the SECO representative (the State Secretariat on Economic Affairs) was informed by Swissinfo about the absence of plans for creating a special working group to track Russian assets, like a number of European countries (for example, France and Germany). Responsibility for informing the authorities about suspicious assets that may fall under sanctions are “persons and institutions that own or manage the appropriate assets and means. If these assets in theory are objects of sanctions, then these persons or institutions are required to immediately report them in Seco. ”

According to the US authorities, they know about 7.75 billion Swiss francs (7.75 billion euros) of Russian assets, which Switzerland froze in the framework of sanctions. In total, as Sonntags Zeitung wrote , a total of 46.1 billion Swiss francs of Russian assets is in Switzerland.

But, according to Miller, the country's authorities could frozen Russian assets in the amount of 50 to 100 billion Swiss francs. The Association of Swiss bankers claims that the volume of Russian assets in the country allegedly reaches 200 billion Swiss francs. At the same time, the association believes that these data are inaccurate - the figure may be much larger.

In March, Credit Suisse reported on the freezing of Russian assets worth about 17.6 billion Swiss francs. Then Le Monde wrote that the Switzerland authorities managed to identify Russian assets in the amount of 42 billion Swiss francs, and frozen from them - 7.5 billion. Already in April of this year, after pressure G7, Switzerland began to consider the opportunity to join the new initiative of developed countries to block the assets of Russian oligarchs and related persons. If Bern goes to this, according to the US ambassador to Switzerland, the country is frozen from 50 to 100 billion francs.

Responding to US reproaches, the university professor Bern Fabio Wasserfallen explained the slowness of Switzerland in joining sanctions by the characteristics of the country's political structure: “Since Switzerland is a federal country, cantons also play an important role in law enforcement.” When making any decisions, the Federal Council (National Public Administration) must consult with cantons, which takes time. In addition, many bills before being accepted are submitted to the referendum and enter into force finally only after voting.

In addition, Switzerland learns about sanctions with the rest of the world. As Laurent Getscell already explains: “Since Switzerland is not a member of the EU, she is not notified in advance of sanctions. As soon as the EU has made a decision, Switzerland receives information and accepts identical or similar sanctions. Насколько мне известно, задержка, которая случается при этом, незначительна».

Однако, кажется, этим причины не исчерпываются. В самой Швейцарии существуют очень разные точки зрения относительно заморозки российских активов. Так, рабочая группа Федерального управления юстиции Швейцарии сообщала следующее: «Гарантия права на собственность закреплена в Конституции. Нет никаких правовых оснований для ареста российской частной собственности».

При этом в 2022 году в швейцарском парламенте все же обсуждался вопрос не только присоединения к ограничениям, которые вводит ЕС, но и собственных односторонних санкций в отношении России. Депутат Элизабет Шнайдер-Шнайтер называла их «важным инструментом, который укрепит дееспособность Федерального совета», а ее коллега Фабиан Молина предлагал задуматься о последствиях бездействия: «Когда нарушается международное право, международное сообщество несет ответственность за то, чтобы заставить нарушителя правил снова соблюдать их. Иначе мы все будем жить в анархии». Летом 2022 года Большая палата парламента Швейцарии одобрила поправки об односторонних санкциях, но позже, в сентябре, они не прошли в Сенате.

Так что на данный момент ведущиеся уже более года дебаты о нейтралитете, реэкспорте оружия и односторонних санкциях в отношении России ни к чему не привели. Каких-то значимых решений по этому поводу Швейцария так и не приняла. Запрет на реэкспорт мешает другим странам поставлять оружие Украине, а неспешность в присоединении к санкциям ЕС оставляет пространство для маневров держателям российских активов.

Как писало издание Swissinfo, с одной стороны, власти конфедерации не хотят злить Европу и Соединенные Штаты, с другой — не хотят терять свою репутацию «надежного (о)хранителя активов от политического внесудебного произвола». Все это, видимо, и заставляет Швейцарию держаться своих принципов, несмотря ни на что.