Switzerland, a country of rock-solid neutrality in the heart of Europe, seems to be facing a historical decision. Having preserved its tradition of neutrality for nearly 200 years, it has always managed to maintain stability and mediate international storms. However, the country broke its longstanding silence on March 13, when Swiss Federal Councilor Ignazio Cassis — who heads the Swiss Department of Foreign Affairs — issued a statement of concern over the escalation of tensions in the Taiwan Strait.
This statement was not without purpose. China’s sudden live-fire military drills in the Taiwan Strait last month not only sparked concern in the region, but even reached as far as Europe. Switzerland’s own definition of neutrality is no longer limited to non-participation in wars — it has expanded to include the moral responsibility and practical interest of safeguarding the international order.
Since Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in 2022, Switzerland has joined other countries in imposing economic sanctions on Russia, breaking its policy of neutrality. The decision to speak out on the Taiwan Strait issue could be seen as a continuation and deepening of this new approach. Swiss Federal Assembly member Jean-Luc Addor said during a legislative session that the Taiwan Strait is crucial to Swiss economic interests. His words reveal the logic behind the action — economic security, geopolitical stability and humanitarian principles cannot be avoided.
This move is not a betrayal of Swiss neutrality, but a modernization. As the international community relies increasingly on the rules-based order and cooperative governance, neutrality should be more than just passive observation — it should take the form of active guardianship. Switzerland’s statement did not indicate that it is taking sides, but emphasized dialogue and peace. This reflects a new interpretation of neutrality.
Switzerland would inevitably have to achieve a delicate balance between sticking to its longstanding principles and adapting to reality. Swiss neutrality is evolving. It is no longer just about silence and concessions — it is about speaking out selectively in defense of principles. The key factor to observe in the future would be whether Switzerland could manage to uphold the core values of its neutral spirit and courageously face the challenges of the current international order without abandoning its beliefs.
Edwin Yang is an associate professor at National Taiwan Normal University and chairman of the Central Taiwan Association of University Professors.
Translated by Kyra Gustavsen
A few weeks ago in Kaohsiung, tech mogul turned political pundit Robert Tsao (曹興誠) joined Western Washington University professor Chen Shih-fen (陳時奮) for a public forum in support of Taiwan’s recall campaign. Kaohsiung, already the most Taiwanese independence-minded city in Taiwan, was not in need of a recall. So Chen took a different approach: He made the case that unification with China would be too expensive to work. The argument was unusual. Most of the time, we hear that Taiwan should remain free out of respect for democracy and self-determination, but cost? That is not part of the usual script, and
Behind the gloating, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) must be letting out a big sigh of relief. Its powerful party machine saved the day, but it took that much effort just to survive a challenge mounted by a humble group of active citizens, and in areas where the KMT is historically strong. On the other hand, the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) must now realize how toxic a brand it has become to many voters. The campaigners’ amateurism is what made them feel valid and authentic, but when the DPP belatedly inserted itself into the campaign, it did more harm than good. The
For nearly eight decades, Taiwan has provided a home for, and shielded and nurtured, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT). After losing the Chinese Civil War in 1949, the KMT fled to Taiwan, bringing with it hundreds of thousands of soldiers, along with people who would go on to become public servants and educators. The party settled and prospered in Taiwan, and it developed and governed the nation. Taiwan gave the party a second chance. It was Taiwanese who rebuilt order from the ruins of war, through their own sweat and tears. It was Taiwanese who joined forces with democratic activists
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) held a news conference to celebrate his party’s success in surviving Saturday’s mass recall vote, shortly after the final results were confirmed. While the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) would have much preferred a different result, it was not a defeat for the DPP in the same sense that it was a victory for the KMT: Only KMT legislators were facing recalls. That alone should have given Chu cause to reflect, acknowledge any fault, or perhaps even consider apologizing to his party and the nation. However, based on his speech, Chu showed
RSS