3 ms·

Are you disputing that Switzerland is historically neutral?

by jl6 5y ago

fortran77 5y ago
I will. They clearly aided and abetted the Germans government over citizens Germany was oppressing/killing during World War II.
- noxer 5y ago
  Switzerland was neutral during WWII. You may just have a simplistic idea of what Swiss neutrality means. It certainly does not mean that the well-being of their own people is sacrificed for some kind of morally righteous "neutral" foreign politics. The people in power back then hat to carefully balance their actions and they had a lot to loose, in hindsight they did incredibly well.
noxer 5y ago
No absolutely not. But the Swiss neutrality is a broad concept/principle not a strictly defined set of actions that the gov can or can not do. The sanction against Russia for example are not in conflict with the neutrality principle despite the media reporting pretending that this is somehow "unexpected" or "a first" or "clearly picking a side" or even "ditching neutrality because Russia so bad". This is either the media sacrificing truth for click bait headlines or straight out propaganda but its in "Wikipedia trusted" media so Wikipedia picks that up because that what it should do. So now you have people thinking Switzerland somehow after 200 year of being neutral sides with EU/NATO whatever against Russia. And if people point out that this is not true, people point to Wikipedia. That is the dilemma. Wikipedia doesn't say its a source for truth but people use it as such anyway.
- topranks 5y ago
  A week before they sanctioned those on the EU list the Swiss government had declined to apply any sanctions, citing Switzerland’s neutrality as the reason. According to Reuters: > Switzerland has steered clear of imposing sanctions in a string of crises, including when Russia annexed Crimea in 2014. Up to now, the exception has been sanctions imposed by the U.N. Security Council, which it has to implement under international law. So certainly it seems like they are “taking sides” here more than ever before. Seems like a change in what they consider being neutral to be.
  - noxer 5y ago
    Its exactly the other way around the sanctions of others pushed them in a non-neutral position where they would allow Russia to circumvent sanctions through Switzerland and Switzerland would profit from this war. THAT is the reason why they joined the sanctions not to "take sides" but to stay neutral according to the Swiss neutrality principle which is not some kind of banal neutrality people think it is that basically assumes Switzerland just pretends nothing happens if its outside their border. That would be ignorance not neutrality. Also see https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30576264 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30576264

Are you disputing that Switzerland is historically neutral?

by jl6 5y ago

Are you disputing that Switzerland is historically neutral?

I will. They clearly aided and abetted the Germans government over citizens Germany was oppressing/killing during World War II.

noxer 5y ago
Switzerland was neutral during WWII. You may just have a simplistic idea of what Swiss neutrality means. It certainly does not mean that the well-being of their own people is sacrificed for some kind of morally righteous "neutral" foreign politics. The people in power back then hat to carefully balance their actions and they had a lot to loose, in hindsight they did incredibly well.

noxer 5y ago

No absolutely not. But the Swiss neutrality is a broad concept/principle not a strictly defined set of actions that the gov can or can not do. The sanction against Russia for example are not in conflict with the neutrality principle despite the media reporting pretending that this is somehow "unexpected" or "a first" or "clearly picking a side" or even "ditching neutrality because Russia so bad". This is either the media sacrificing truth for click bait headlines or straight out propaganda but its in "Wikipedia trusted" media so Wikipedia picks that up because that what it should do. So now you have people thinking Switzerland somehow after 200 year of being neutral sides with EU/NATO whatever against Russia. And if people point out that this is not true, people point to Wikipedia. That is the dilemma. Wikipedia doesn't say its a source for truth but people use it as such anyway.

topranks 5y ago
A week before they sanctioned those on the EU list the Swiss government had declined to apply any sanctions, citing Switzerland’s neutrality as the reason. According to Reuters: > Switzerland has steered clear of imposing sanctions in a string of crises, including when Russia annexed Crimea in 2014. Up to now, the exception has been sanctions imposed by the U.N. Security Council, which it has to implement under international law. So certainly it seems like they are “taking sides” here more than ever before. Seems like a change in what they consider being neutral to be.
- noxer 5y ago
  Its exactly the other way around the sanctions of others pushed them in a non-neutral position where they would allow Russia to circumvent sanctions through Switzerland and Switzerland would profit from this war. THAT is the reason why they joined the sanctions not to "take sides" but to stay neutral according to the Swiss neutrality principle which is not some kind of banal neutrality people think it is that basically assumes Switzerland just pretends nothing happens if its outside their border. That would be ignorance not neutrality. Also see https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30576264 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30576264