Wanted: politically convenient definition of ‘neutrality’

In the wake of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, Switzerland is in search of a new interpretation of its neutrality. An international comparison shows that neutrality has many guises.

During peace talks Russian President Vladimir Putin has repeatedly demanded that Ukraine become neutral – thereby removing its chances of joining defence alliance NATO.

Pascal Lottaz, a Swiss researcher who focuses on neutrality studies, is convinced that the aim of this suggestion is to achieve the neutralisation of Ukraine. “It’s similar to what happened to Switzerland in 1815 [when it regained independence]. The only difference is that’s what Switzerland actively wanted,” he says.

Earlier this year Ukraine proposed adopting neutral status in exchange for security guarantees from other countries, preferably NATO states. “At this point, the peace talks stalled. Russia doesn’t want that as security guarantees would amount to NATO membership,” Lottaz explains.

When European powers finally recognised Switzerland’s “perpetual neutrality” at the Congress of Vienna in 1815, the Swiss government did not receive guarantees of protection from other countries. And the fact that Switzerland is not a NATO member state means it is the sole security provider for its people.

Neutrality has many facets to it. Governments and organisations such as the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) and the United Nations have their own different interpretations of it. Neutrality can be self-defined, or it can be imposed upon a country by other governments. But no matter how countries became neutral, they have always been an effective buffer in conflict zones between superpowers.

Most neutral states have strong armies to defend themselves and keep foreign troops out.

States such as Costa Rica, Liechtenstein and the Vatican have adopted “unarmed neutrality”, which means they do not have their own military defence. Costa Rica counts on the US for protection, Liechtenstein hopes that Switzerland will come to its aid, and the Vatican is a special case altogether.

Some countries choose to be neutral just to isolate themselves from the international community. “Turkmenistan, for example, uses its neutrality to stay out of international alliances and make sure nobody interferes in its domestic affairs,” Lottaz says. Myanmar did the same until ten years ago and so did Albania during the Cold War.

Other countries, such as Switzerland and Austria – and Sweden and Finland before they recently applied for NATO membership, use their neutrality to play a role on the international stage and promote their good offices. They have an integrated approach, according to Lottaz.

“Sweden and Finland lost their neutrality status a while ago. They are now considered to be non-aligned, but if they joined NATO, it would put an end to their neutral status” he says.

Lottaz believes that the loss of neutral states could fuel the conflict in Ukraine and upset Europe’s stability. Even though he is happy that the debate about neutrality has been rekindled at home and abroad, he hopes as many countries as possible will remain neutral. In his view, this would contribute to the de-escalation of conflicts.

“However, the trend at the moment is anti-neutrality. Some Western governments consider Switzerland’s neutrality as support for Russia and therefore morally unjustifiable,” he says.

Some analysts and politicians call the gradual disappearance of neutral countries a turning point, while others speak of a new Cold War which calls for the revival of the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM).

This alliance was established in Belgrade, having been initiated by Egypt, India and the former Yugoslavia during the first Cold War. It comprised 120 mainly African and Asian countries that remained neutral during the simmering East-West conflict and were not aligned with any major power bloc. Under pressure from Russia, Ukraine joined the alliance in 2010 only to leave again in 2014. The NAM still exists but has not been particularly relevant since the end of the Cold War.

“It has regained significance and could be revamped just like NATO reinvented itself because of the war in Ukraine. The dynamics have changed again,” Lottaz says, pointing out that the lack of such a union enabled China, India, Indonesia, Ghana and some South American countries to refuse to sanction Russia.

Even though they don’t use the term officially, India and China have maintained “situational neutrality” in the war in Ukraine. It means they take a neutral stand only in the face of a particular aggression and may not remain neutral in other conflicts like perpetually neutral countries would do.

The position of India and China on the war in Ukraine is similar to the US’s stance towards Europe during the Second World War. For the first two years the US followed its 150-year tradition of remaining neutral in European wars. However, this ended in 1941 when Pearl Harbor was attacked and they entered the Second World War.

“The US of the 19th century can be compared to the China of today,” Lottaz says. “China isn’t looking to join a military alliance. It’s not happy about the war in Ukraine, but it doesn’t want to be involved in any war. Only if the country in question were Taiwan would China be ready to wage war.”

According to Lottaz, superpowers have always been able to adopt neutral positions in different situations. He says this situational neutrality was instituted by the Hague Conventions of 1899 and 1907 which focused on the big powers and did not give smaller nations such as Austria and Switzerland much thought.

“For this reason, the law on neutrality is very liberal. It allows neutral governments to buy and sell weapons as long as they treat all warring parties equally,” he says.

Lottaz calls the Hague Conventions outdated as they have been amended only a few times since 1907. For example, cyberspace and missiles did not exist back then and were not included in the neutrality law. “The Conventions have to be updated to reflect the realities of the 21st century,” he says.

Researcher Lea Schaad, an expert in security issues, claims that many Swiss do not know the difference between neutrality law and neutrality policy. While neutrality law forbids neutral countries to engage in armed conflict, neutrality policy solely requires neutral countries to convince other nations not to engage in a war. This makes neutrality policy a lot more flexible than neutrality law.

Pascal Lottaz says that Switzerland has also been rather flexible when it comes to its own neutrality. When Switzerland was a member of the League of Nations between the First and Second World Wars, it pursued “differential neutrality”, which means it did not participate in military sanctions but joined economic sanctions. However, when Italy invaded Ethiopia in 1935, Switzerland was forced to switch back to “integral neutrality” as its southern canton of Ticino was severely affected by the economic sanctions imposed on Italy.

Schaad thinks the debate on neutrality was given a further boost in May when Swiss Foreign Minister Ignazio Cassis coined the phrase “cooperative neutrality” at the World Economic Forum.

For Lottaz, terms like “active neutrality”, “committed neutrality” or “cooperative neutrality” are political and were created purely to repackage neutrality. Schaad agrees: “Maybe this marks the beginning of Cassis’s attempt to re-interpret neutrality.”

Both researchers agree that the flexibility of a neutrality policy results in the same discussions between the same sides. On the one hand, those with a traditional and strict understanding of neutrality require Switzerland to treat warring parties equally, both militarily and economically, which rules out the use of sanctions. “We’ve now reached a point where some want to return to integral neutrality,” Lottaz says.

On the other hand, those with a more relaxed understanding of neutrality do not want Switzerland to take an isolationist path; they want the government to take a more active position.

“It would be nice if we could clarify what our policy is,” Schaad says. “This would eliminate the endless discussions of how Switzerland should act every time there is a geopolitical event.”

A clear policy might be just around the corner because the government has announced a new report on neutrality. In the previous report, in 1993, the government outlined how it intended to define neutrality.

According to Schaad, the new report could lead to yet another interpretation, as happened after the end of the Cold War. “The changed geopolitical landscape today also requires a new interpretation of neutrality,” she says.

If and how Switzerland reinterprets its neutrality will be interesting for other countries. “There is the hope that Switzerland will be able to react faster,” Schaad says. When war broke out in Ukraine, Switzerland’s reluctance to adopt sanctions against Russia imposed by the US and its Western allies was criticised.

However, this government’s plan to give neutrality a new meaning could be scuppered by Christoph Blocher, a former government minister and billionaire figurehead of the right-wing Swiss People’s Party. He is planning to launch a popular vote to make strict neutrality an integral part of the Swiss constitution. Such an initiative would mean that the last word on Swiss neutrality would go to the Swiss people.

Translated from German by Billi Bierling/ts

What does "neutral" mean?

great-chartreuse-hare

https://pilot-prod-videos.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/en/great-chartreuse-hare_roh-rumgr_RECAPP.vtt

Why Switzerland is neutral

Does Swiss neutrality still make sense?

Switzerland has historically played an important diplomatic role between belligerents in various international conflicts, thanks to its status of ‘neutrality’. This policy has had its successes and failures, and is becoming harder to maintain.

Isabelle Bannerman

https://pilot-prod-videos.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/en/busy-puce-moth_fr_DEEPGRAM-WHISPER.vtt

Swiss neutrality: successes and failures

Find out where you stand

Is Russia on the verge of launching attacks on other nations?

Military specialist Fabian Hoffmann suggests that Russia might consider assaulting other nations soon. Is this a plausible scenario? Security experts evaluate the situation.

Susanne Stöckl

https://pilot-prod-videos.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/en/graceful-bronze-landfowl_de_DEEPGRAM-WHISPER.vtt

Fabian Hoffmann, a security expert and nuclear researcher at the University of Oslo, cautioned in a post on X (previously known as Twitter) that Russia could strike additional targets in Europe within the next two to three years. The Baltic states, specifically Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania, are particularly vulnerable. From these locations, Russian President Vladimir Putin could launch further attacks on Europe. Hoffmann says that Europe should brace for the worst, and only a united Europe can dissuade Russia from launching an attack.

According to Fredy Gsteiger, security expert for SRF, warnings like Fabian Hoffman's are increasingly common. This is not about spreading fear. Prominent politicians, including German Defence Minister Boris Pistorius, are also discussing this. NATO needs to contemplate this, particularly as Western nations are far from well prepared for such a scenario. The Commander-in-Chief of the Swedish military and Ukrainian President Volodimir Zelensky have echoed similar sentiments in recent days, warning of potential Russian attacks.

An attack by Russia on Western Europe would put Swiss neutrality to the test.

How plausible is such a scenario? François Heisbourg, a security expert and president of the International Institute for Strategic Studies, does not perceive Russia as a threat currently, since it is presently weakened and must initially manage the military losses from the Ukraine conflict. However, he also mentions that merely two years ago, a Russian attack on Ukraine was deemed highly improbable.

What are the implications for Switzerland? Fredy Gsteiger suggests that if Russian attacks were indeed to occur on our neighbouring countries, then the pressure on Switzerland to pledge itself to a more comprehensive European defence would increase. After all, Switzerland maintains neutrality and can only defend itself if it is attacked. This could heighten the desire among the populace to join an alliance, such as NATO, for enhanced protection. An assault on Western Europe would put Swiss neutrality to the test.

Will Russia attack other nations?

How thousands of Swiss micro-electronic components still end up in Russia

Entities facing sanctions and foreign transporters on blacklists: this is the method through which the prohibited Swiss technology continues to reach Moscow, documents analysed by the Swiss public service broadcaster RSI show.

Simone Fassora

https://pilot-prod-videos.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/en/sure-rose-lizard_it_SPEECHMATICS.vtt

Taped to the exterior of the door is an A4 sheet of paper, with a company name printed on in Cyrillic: "Ural Telecom Systems." We are on the third floor of a building in the heart of Yekaterinburg, a Russian city in the Urals renowned for its industrial and even military hub. It is through this company, which is actually operating under another name, that approximately one-third of all product imports from Traco Power, a company based in Baar that is specialised in electronic systems, are routed. Its semiconductors have previously been discovered in Russian weaponry.

Sanctions discussed from Washington to Bern

This is just one of many cases we uncovered in our research. Western and Swiss technology has become vital to Vladimir Putin's military, which is striving to acquire it in spite of sanctions, following the outbreak of war in Ukraine. The material is particularly crucial for missiles, communication systems, and drones, as several reports by various independent international think tanks, such as the Royal United Services Institute (RUSI) and Conflict Armament Research (CAR), have indicated.

To curb armament production, Switzerland has also imposed sanctions. Cutting off this supply completely is a key aim for the United States and its allies, but also a challenging one. A vital and tough goal that prompted Brian Nelson, U.S. Undersecretary for Terrorism and Financial Intelligence, to visit Bern two weeks ago for discussions with the Swiss Federal Authorities.

According to Fabian Maienfisch, spokesman for the State Secretariat for Economic Affairs - who we interviewed - the meeting was "extremely constructive and respectful". The "shared objective" of "effective implementation of sanctions was reiterated, even though Switzerland has not joined the international task force", Maienfisch added.

However, the RSI has found that high-tech products from Swiss companies still made their way to Moscow. With access to customs databases, we examined and analysed dozens of documents, uncovering ghost companies sanctioned by the federal government, and foreign shippers who landed on international blacklists.

In addition, the presence of Swiss-made microchips in Russian drones was reported by Bonfire, in partnership with the RSI investigations unit.

23.03.2023: Swiss technology still flows to Russia today

As previously mentioned, Traco Power's products continued to reach Russia even after the war had started. From March 2022, when the Swiss federal government imposed sanctions, until August 2022, according to the data we have, more than a thousand shipments of Traco Power products were sent to Moscow, worth a total of 22,600 Swiss francs. These were mainly electronic converters and microchip systems. A report by the Independent Anticorruption Commission of Ukraine (Nako) last February revealed that these systems from the company based in Baar were found in some of the Russian communication systems used in Donbass.

Most of the shipments are carried out by Chinese and Turkish import-export firms. Two of the biggest ones are the “BRK Logistics Transportation and Trade Limited Company in Transit Transaction” and “Smart Trading Tasimacilik San Ve LTD”, both based in Istanbul, Turkey. The United States recently imposed sanctions on the latter.

The main buyer in Russia is "Ural Telecom Systems", which has imported about a third of the over one thousand shipments of Traco Power's products. On its website, Ural Telecom Systems states that it "specialises in customs clearance and provides consultancy for electronic components of the most renowned products". Founded in 2019 in Yekaterinburg, one of its founders set up another Russian entity active in electronics under his name: "GetChips", which was recently sanctioned by Ukraine. 

Since last November, when a new CEO took over, Ural Telecom Systems has changed its name and registered as "Power Telecom" at the commercial register. The reason for this move is unknown. What is clear is that the war has boosted its income considerably. The Ukrainian Foreign Ministry and the National Agency for the Prevention of Corruption are keeping an eye on the company, but no country has sanctioned it yet.

Traco Power told us that it "immediately suspended all shipments and trade relations to Russia, including those via third countries" and added that "all our authorised sales channels have been clearly informed. Traco Power products, which have been used for any purpose in Russia, cannot have come from our company since 28 Feb. 2022, when the EU sanctions came into force." However, documents show that their products reached Russia via other countries even after the export ban.

Swiss micro-electronic components on nuclear warheads

Products of another Swiss-based company, STMicroelectronics, were also imported to Russia via other countries. The French-Italian multinational is a leader in the semiconductor industry, with its registered office in Geneva. Its semiconductors have been found on several Russian weapons, such as the Kalibr and Iskander missiles. Iskander missiles have the ability to carry nuclear warheads and may soon be moved to Belarus, according to the Kremlin.

According to the customs databases we consulted from March to August 2022, the company’s products were shipped to Russia at least 6,700 times. The total value of the cargo was 412,000 francs. As the customs documents show, these were mainly “transistors and semiconductors as well as monolithic electronic integrated circuits.”

The largest importer of STMicroelectronics products remains the Russian company Ural Telecom Systems. The importing companies also include Russian entities that Switzerland has sanctioned, such as SMT iLogic, which has been under sanction since 29 March 2022. About a hundred shipments were received by the company. It is allegedly linked to another Russian company, the Special Technology Centre (STC) based in St. Petersburg, which manufactures armaments for the Russian military, especially Orlan drones. Many Western countries have also sanctioned it.

We asked for a statement, STMicroelectronics clarified by email that it had implemented “a comprehensive global trade compliance programme that complies with all international trade rules and regulations […] each part of our supply chain.” The email also stated that the company “understands its responsibility to comply with applicable laws and regulations. And since the end of February 2022, we have taken actions to comply with the specific requirements of multiple packages of sanctions and control measures, such as strengthening compliance requirements for all our sales channels, including vigilance against penalty evasion and shipment diversion.”

However, RSI investigations show that its products also go to another Russian company that Switzerland has sanctioned: Vest-Ost, which is also based in Yekaterinburg where it was founded in 2009. The Russian trade register says that the company’s business name is “the wholesale of furniture, household goods, knives and metal products”. It is also a distributor of computer and telecommunications equipment, as we found out through open-source analysis via web.archive.org, which retrieves web pages that are no longer accessible today.

Vest-Ost also came under scrutiny by the United States on April 17 when the Bureau of Industry and Security blacklisted it. According to the U.S. Department of Commerce website, the reason for the blacklisting was “for attempting to evade export controls and acquiring or attempting to acquire U.S.-origin (and Western-origin) items in support of Russia’s military and/or defence industry.” Specifically, the department explained, “this company continued to procure or attempted to procure items on behalf of Russian entities that were sanctioned after the Russian invasion of Ukraine.”

A widespread problem that is hard to tackle is the evasion of sanctions by third-country companies that do not follow Western measures. As a result, the United States is responding with extra measures, known as “secondary sanctions”. The Commerce Department’s list last April included many other Turkish and Chinese entities, such as King-Pai Technology based in Hong Kong. This Asian shipper also exported prohibited Swiss goods to Russia after sanctions were implemented.

According to the United States, King-Pai Technology has supplied material to multiple entities in Russia’s military-industrial complex, including Radioavtomatika, a subsidiary of Rostec, which specialises in sourcing foreign items for the Russian defence industry. The U.S. Treasury said that “microelectronics supplied by King-Pai have defence applications that include guidance systems for cruise missiles.” RSI found at least 106 shipments related to STMicroelectronics chips exported to Russia by King-Pai, many of which were addressed specifically to the sanctioned Vest-Ost. But it did not end there.

More than 500 shipments were also made by two other Chinese import-export companies that the United States had sanctioned: STK Electronics Co. Limited of Hong Kong and Sinno Electronics Co. Limited. They were sanctioned “for providing support to Russia’s military and defence industrial base and for continuing to enter into contracts to supply parts listed and sanctioned by Russian entities after the Russian invasion of Ukraine.”

02.05.2023: Ukraine, Russian offensive continues

The products of another Swiss company, which were also found in Ukraine on some electronic systems used by the Kremlin’s military, continued to be delivered to Russia after sanctions were implemented. We are talking about the Swiss-US multinational Te Connectivity, with its headquarters in Schaffhausen. The data we consulted shows that from March to August last year, there were more than 7,800 shipments, totalling more than 116,000 Swiss francs, mainly related to connectors or electrical appliances and installations.

Back on the third floor of the building in central Yekaterinburg, where one of the main recipients - among others - is Ural Telecom System. We asked TE Connectivity for a response, and the company said that “all export controls apply to its global operations and it has fully complied with all sanctions imposed on Russia after the invasion of Ukraine.” From March 2022, “it also commits to its policy of no direct or indirect shipments of its products to Moscow, and will continue to communicate this policy with distribution partners and expects them to comply.”

Products from NVS Technologies Ag also went to Russia: 18 shipments in total, worth 90,000 rubles (about 9,000 Swiss francs) of goods. Chinese shippers handled almost all of the products. Among these, the customs documents say, were not only microchips, but also radionavigation equipment and marine radar. The final recipients included Russian entities that were sanctioned, such as STM iLogic, which was linked to the Kremlin’s defence sector, and Testkomplekt, which Ukraine had recently sanctioned.

NVS Technologies is a company based in Oberriet, a municipality of eight thousand inhabitants in the Swiss canton of St. Gallen. The company was founded in 2004 by a Russian-born citizen and is active in the design and sale of electronic systems and components. The CEO is also the co-founder of KB Navis, a Russian company based in Moscow that is under sanction in Ukraine. It controls NVS Telematic System, a leader in the design of products using GLONASS (the Russian GPS) signals, which the Kremlin military now uses mainly for missiles and drones. A public document says that KB Navis has 106 contracts with the Russian federal government, including the defence sector. Apart from Kiev, no other country has sanctioned these companies.

We contacted NVS Technologies, and the company replied that “it has adhered to all regulations and implemented a rigorous internal programme,” but it did not answer our more specific questions. We asked whether it was really aware of these shipments by foreign shippers even after the sanctions, whether it supervised these third-party entities thoroughly, and whether it would take further steps to increase internal “due diligence.”

07.03.2023: Those Swiss components in Russian weapons

No investigation in Switzerland for violation of sanctions

We asked the State Secretariat for Economic Affairs (SECO) how sanctions were being evaded by third countries. “Russia, but also Iran, are buying their technology products for military purposes at the moment. And many countries have no measures, especially against Russia. This is also a challenge for SECO: to carry out export controls to prevent Swiss products from being diverted from third countries and then sent to Moscow in particular,” Jürgen Boehler, head of Export Control/Industrial Products at SECO, explained to us.

He said, however, that “it is also the Swiss exporter’s responsibility to know their customer. Although for mass-produced products like chips, it is almost impossible to recognise the true final recipient.” But Swiss companies have responsibilities. Boehler explained that “it is clear that if a Swiss company sells goods made in Switzerland and knows that the final destination is Russia or Iran, this is prohibited.” If it has doubts, SECO can report the suspected violations to the Office of the Attorney General of Switzerland, which will investigate. The Embargo Law says: imprisonment for up to one year or a fine of up to 500,000 Swiss francs for a violation. In serious cases, the penalty is imprisonment for up to five years.

We contacted the Federal Prosecutor’s Office, and it explained that “no notification of the opening of proceedings in connection with sanctions against Russia has been filed to date, but a notification has been made in connection with the delivery of prohibited goods to Ukraine. After reviewing the complaint, it decided that the opening of a criminal investigation was unwarranted and that any violations of sanctions were the responsibility of SECO. Various clarifications are currently underway, for which it can give no further information.”

The issue of breaching technology and dual-use sanctions became political last September with a proposal from Geneva National Councillor Stefania Prezioso Batou, and new parliamentary acts might be filed soon. This is a crucial issue that the European Union is also debating.