The Neutrality of Switzerland

DURING those dark days, at the beginning of the century, when Switzerland had become the battlefield of Europe, and her independence was trampled underfoot alike by Napoleon and the Allies, Wordsworth broke forth in that noble lament which is entitled, in the collection of his poems, Thought of a Briton on the Subjugation of Switzerland. Coupling the fall of Venice with that of Switzerland in his mind, he thus apostrophizes Liberty: —

Happily, that time of national degradation is now only an evil memory, for soon after these words were uttered Switzerland arose from the state of complete prostration into which she had fallen, collected her forces during many succeeding years of peace, and, after various vicissitudes, finally won her present position of honor and usefulness amongst the nations.

It is surprising to notice how this country, with whose name we associate some of our noblest conceptions of liberty, has run up and down the gamut of self-government, striking all the intervening notes between complete subjugation and unquestioned independence. From the time when Switzerland first appeared in history, at the beginning of the Christian era, until the close of the Swabian war in 1499, she was always subject to an outside power; from that date until toward the end of the seventeenth century she was an independent, sovereign state; but, after that, France succeeded in persuading her into alliances which almost imperceptibly assumed the proportions of protectorates: so that, after the rise of Napoleon, and before the Congress of Vienna, Switzerland had sunk to the position of a mere vassal of France.

It was at this point, when the lowest degree in the scale had been reached, that the signatory powers at the Congress of Vienna, on the 20th of March. 1815, announced their intention of drawing up an act which should guarantee the perpetual neutrality of Switzerland. On the 27th of May the Swiss Diet accepted this offer, but there was a delay of several months before the pledge given by the powers was fulfilled; for the great struggle at Waterloo, which took place in the mean time, overshadowed every other phase of the European situation. Finally, on the 20th of November, the document which was to exert so potent an influence upon the destinies of the Swiss people was approved by the Congress. “The signatory powers of the declaration made at Vienna on the 20th of March, ” says the text, “by the present act make a formal and authentic acknowledgment of the perpetual neutrality of Switzerland, and they guarantee to her the integrity and inviolability of her territory within her new boundaries.” This agreement is further on declared to be “in the true interests of the polities of all Europe.”

If any one should be tempted to say that even these solemn promises were insufficient to establish the neutrality of Switzerland upon an unquestioned legal basis, surely the array of great names appended to this document ought to remove all doubts. Amongst them, there was Metternich for Austria, Richelieu for France, Wellington for England, Humboldt for Prussia, and Capo d’stria for Russia. It would be a strange forgetfulness of the past which could make the powers declare null and void an act signed by historic names such as these. The person who actually prepared the text was the Swiss representative at the Congress, Charles Pictet de Rochemont, a Genevese; the task having been first assigned to Stratford Canning, who preferred to leave it to Pictet.

There was no condition appended to this declaration of neutrality beyond the natural one that the Swiss Diet should agree to the terms of the proposed transaction, a duty which that body promptly performed. At least one of these accepted terms deserves to be noticed, on account of the negotiations to which it has since given rise, and the dangers to European peace with which it is still fraught. The so-called “question of Savoy ” resulted from a compromise effected at this time among the conflicting interests of France, Switzerland, and the king of Sardinia. During the discussions of the Congress, it was proposed, and very properly, to give Switzerland the whole of the geographical basin between the Jura and the Alps, in order that she might have a natural and logical frontier; but, instead of this simple solution of the difficulty, the representatives at the Congress ended by setting up a complicated and irrational system of apportionment. France was allowed to retain parts of this basin, and a zone was created in northern Savoy which should be included in the neutrality of Switzerland, “in the same manner as though it belonged to her.” In 1859, the cession of Nice and Savoy to France brought this curious state of affairs to the notice of Europe. Napoleon III, offered to concede certain further rights to Switzerland; but they were refused as insufficient, and, during an interchange of notes between the two governments in 1883. it was acknowledged that the conditions created by the act of 1815 were still in force. The zone presents, therefore, the strange anomaly of being French territory, and yet enjoying the same sort of neutrality as Switzerland; of furnishing soldiers for the French army, and, in the event of a European war. being forbidden ground for contending armies. Moreover, any interference of Switzerland in that quarter, to which she is legally entitled, according to the terms of the act of 1815, would now undoubtedly produce grave international complications; so that the whole question may be considered to be in a very unsatisfactory state, and to be prevented from endangering peace only by the especially friendly relations which exist between the Swiss and the French.

It is one thing to be endowed with this privilege of perpetual neutrality, and quite another matter to maintain it inviolate, as Switzerland has found on more than one occasion. Her last opportunity to assert her neutrality by a show of armed force occurred in 1871, during the closing months of the Franco-German war. In January of that critical year, the French army of the East, under Bourbaki, had retreated from Belfort upon the Swiss frontier, and then, surrounded by the Germans, decimated by cold and hunger, had taken refuge upon Swiss soil to the number of about 85,000 men. with 10,000 horses and 200 guns. A body of 20,000 Swiss troops promptly disarmed them, and distributed them over Switzerland, where for something like seven weeks they were cared for in a manner which has always been remembered with gratitude by the French nation, and is still frequently mentioned upon public occasions.

Twenty years have passed since Bourbaki’s soldiers made their entry into Switzerland, but it seems to me only the other day that my brother and I went out upon the highway that skirts the Lake of Geneva from Lausanne to Vevay. where we were living at the time, to see a detachment of this ill-fated army straggle into town. Swiss guards marched ahead, exemplifying the blessings of peace : then came their captives, illustrating the horrors of war. Poor fellows! Amongst them were mere boys, hastily recruited in the hour of peril, now disarmed, and weary with a hopeless struggle against an enemy far superior to them in leadership and discipline. Worn with terrible privations from being so long cut off from their base of supplies, their uniforms torn, and the gay red, so dear to the French heart, sadly discolored, they stumbled into the little Swiss town: some silent with the weight of their national shame; others plaintively talkative, full of ghastly tales.

It is somewhat remarkable that the Swiss name is still connected with an institution which might be classed as an infraction of the principles of neutrality. if it were not so very harmless and theatrical. Visitors to the Vatican will remember the Pope’s Swiss Guard, those picturesque but antiquated soldiers, clad in their yellow, black, and red uniforms, said to have been designed by Michael Angelo. It is to be hoped that the time will never come when these Swiss soldiers will be brought into conflict with the Italian populace, for Switzerland would be placed in a very embarrassing situation by any such contingency. Fortunately. there is little chance of any armed interference on the part of the Italian government, for the latter has learned not to take the papal pretensions too seriously.

But in the past this mercenary system was a source of great danger to the Swiss Confederation in her foreign relations, and of demoralization in her internal affairs. There was a time when fighting for pay was considered a perfectly legitimate and honorable means of gaining a living. During the Italian campaigns at the end of the fifteenth and beginning of the sixteenth century, Swiss mercenaries performed prodigies of valor, and earned the reputation of being the most desirable soldiers in Europe ; so that the chief towns of the cantons were full of foreign ambassadors intriguing to secure fresh levies for their sovereigns. “Pas d’argent, pas de Suisses, ” was the saying which then arose, and has ever since been made a cause of reproach to the Confederation, although an explanation of the origin of this sentence has been given, which, if correct, makes it redound to the honor rather than to the shame of the mercenaries. It appears that, while in the service of France, some Swiss troops were unable to obtain their pay, and they therefore declared their intention of returning home. They were urged, however, to live by brigandage, like other bands of mercenaries out of employment, until they could be reëngaged; and when they refused to do this, a French general is said to have exclaimed, “ Pas d’argent, pas de Suisses,” in impatience at their scruples. Even if this explanation is far fetched and improbable, there is a good deal to be said in excuse of the Swiss: the barrenness of their mountains, the hard struggle for existence in the face of the contending elements, and their early training in the use of arms must all be taken as extenuating circumstances. Perhaps the best answer which has ever been given to this reproach was that made by a Swiss to a Frenchman. “We fight for honor, you for money. ” said the Frenchman. “Yes,” replied the Swiss, “we both fight for what we have not got.”

It is the right of asylum which has given Switzerland the greatest trouble in the exercise of her neutrality. The late Sir F. O. Adams, minister of Great Britain at Bern, says in regard to this point, in his book The Swiss Confederation: “The question of the right of asylum has been at times a difficult one for Swiss statesmen; but the invariable principle that has guided them, even when there has been pressure from abroad, is stated to be that Switzerland, whilst maintaining that right in its integrity, cannot allow foreigners who have taken refuge upon her soil to abuse her hospitality by organizing conspiracies against foreign governments; still less to lay plans for the commission of crimes against individuals, or for injuring their property.” As maybe imagined, it is no easy matter to apply these principles impartially, and to distinguish between purely political crimes and offenses against common law; but at all times the little Confederation has shown the greatest courage in ignoring foreign threats, and in interpreting her duty according to her own standards. In 1838, she preferred to mobilize her troops rather than to submit to the demand of the French government to give up Louis Napoleon, the subsequent Emperor, who had taken refuge at Arenenberg, on the Lake of Constance. Only lately, in the summer of 1889, a ripple of excitement passed over the surface of the diplomatic world on account of what was known as the Wohlgemuth affair. A German police officer of that name was detected practicing the arts of an agent provocateur amongst the German socialist and anarchist fugitives in Switzerland; that is, he was engaged in ingratiating himself into their good will by pretending to be one of them, and was caught urging them to commit open acts of violence which would lead to their arrest. It is almost incredible that the great powers should stoop to such baseness, but the history of the last few years in Europe is full of the doings of these official spies. Our friend Wohlgemuth was promptly clapped into prison, on the accusation of inciting to a breach of the peace, and later politely conducted to the frontier, after repeated remonstrances from Bismarck, at that time still in the heyday of his glory as Chancellor of the empire. There may have been some irregularities in the manner in which the police officer was treated, but every impartial person was delighted at the fearlessness displayed by the local Swiss authorities. The incident did not, however, end with Wohlgemuth’s expulsion, for Bismarck took this occasion to try to bully Switzerland after his most approved method. He made the impossible request that the Swiss government should hereafter refuse the right of asylum to every German subject not provided with papers signed by the officials of his native country, denounced the treaty of settlement which existed between Germany and Switzerland, and, what was more serious, threatened to withdraw the guarantee of his government to Switzerland’s perpetual neutrality. In 1870, a few days after the declaration of war against France, Bismarck had written, in answer to a circular letter sent by the Swiss Federal Council, “Germany will scrupulously respect the neutrality of Switzerland guaranteed by the treaties; ” but in 1889 he professed to consider this promise as no longer binding.

I happened to be spending the summer of 1889 in Switzerland, and found popular feeling running very high against these Bismarckian methods. Of course the newspapers of both countries made much of the incident, with that peculiar abandon which characterizes all press wars; but the height of recklessness and disregard of established rights was reached by a German paper, which went so far as to suggest the partition of Swiss territory amongst Germany, France, Austria, and Italy, as the simplest solution of the great European problem. After boiling up ominously for a while, the waters subsided, but not before Bismarck had succeeded in persuading the Russian government to remonstrate against Switzerland’s lenient attitude toward the nihilist fugitives on her soil. In connection with this, it is interesting to recall a conversation which the Archduke John of Austria related to Pictet as having taken place between himself and Czar Alexander I. in 1815, upon this very subject of the Swiss right of asylum, “I said to him” (the Czar), said the archduke to Pictet, “ ‘ How can Switzerland be really neutral, if she has not a military frontier? Is it not necessary that there should be some place where honest men under persecution, where suppressed thought, can find an asylum ? ’ He took my hands with emotion, and said to me, ‘Ah! how I like to hear you speak thus! ’ ” The upshot of the Wohlgemuth affair was that the Swiss authorities instituted an extra force of police to watch the doings of foreign agitators, another treaty of settlement was concluded with Germany, and the threats made by Bismarck were followed by assurances of good will. At the present time the question is of course closed, but a feeling of distrust has remained amongst the Swiss, and a deepened conviction that they must learn to depend more and more upon their own exertions to maintain their much - prized neutrality.

It must be remembered, in treating of this subject, that there is a distinction between a case of ordinary neutrality, which is the state of any country preserving an impartial bearing while its neighbors are engaged in war, and the perpetual or guaranteed neutrality which belongs to Switzerland by virtue of international agreements. The latter is a special privilege, accorded only under exceptional circumstances. It is unquestionably the strategic importance of the little Confederation, out of all proportion to the extent of her territory, which has made her the recipient of such a favor; for Switzerland’s position and topographical features are such as to render her the great natural fortress of central Europe, and the key to the military situation. In fact, her importance, from this point of view, has steadily increased in modern times, as the balance of power between the rival nations has approached nearer and nearer to an equilibrium. At the present moment, it may be said that the power which could operate with Switzerland as a basis could dictate †lie terms of peace; so that the absolute neutrality of this territory is essential to the very existence of modern Europe.

To examine the situation from a purely military standpoint, what are the chances of Swiss territory being invaded during the next great war? It seems to me that the advantages which certain powers would find in pushing troops through Switzerland, in order to attack their rivals upon the flank, would be so great that the temptation could not possibly be resisted, if only military considerations were allowed to have the upper hand. In case of a duel between France and Germany, the likelihood of such a violation is not great, for the invading nation would immediately find Switzerland making common cause with the enemy, and. in the present state of affairs, this slight advantage might decide the issue; but since the formation of the Triple Alliance the risk has measurably increased. A glance at the map reveals Germany on the north, Austria on the east, and Italy on the south, leagued together against France on the west. Switzerland is, therefore, completely surrounded by a cordon of armies. eager to attack each other across her territory. Austria, perhaps, would not need to make use of Swiss soil, for, according to present indications, all her available troops would be engaged in a struggle with Russia: nor would Germany, apparently, gain very much by such a move, for, after crossing Switzerland. she would be confronted by a strong line in France, Belfort-Besancon and Lyons. But the right of passage would undoubtedly be of inestimable value to France and Italy. The former could, in twenty-four hours, throw a large force upon Germany’s unprotected flank, the line Basel-SchaffhausenConstance; while the latter could reach France by the undefended Swiss passes of the Simplon and the Great St. Bernard. and by the Lake of Geneva. The chances are. consequently, that if Swiss neutrality were violated at all it would be by the French and the Italians; and there seems to be no doubt that, whichever of these powers made the first move, the other would immediately follow suit by hastily throwing forward an army to check the enemy’s advance. Switzerland would then again become the seat of war, as in 1814.

In view of this military situation, what resistance could the Swiss offer to the invaders ? Of course no one pretends that they could hold their own single-handed, even against an isolated European power, for any length of time, but the necessity for such action is scarcely imaginable. If the Swiss were called upon to fight at all, it would be only to hold certain positions until the friendly powers could come to their aid, and not to carry on great offensive operations. For defensive purposes, the Swiss have organized a militia force which, comprising all the reserves, in 1889 numbered no less than 475, 795 men, although the total population of the country falls below 3,000,000 inhabitants. This army is not a parade force; it has certain weaknesses which are inseparable from militias everywhere, but it is complete in every detail, can be rapidly mobilized. and does not drain the resources of the nation like a standing army. If the Swiss soldier is slovenly, he is at the same time the best average shot in the world, and yields to no one in his readiness to sacrifice his life in the holy cause of liberty. On the whole, the chances of Switzerland’s performing her part creditably in the next war would be favorable; she would do her duty.

So much for the purely military side of the question; but, fortunately, there is another and a higher aspect of the case. A moral principle is involved, which is of far greater importance to the European powers, and is therefore more likely to triumph in the end. For it must be remembered that Europe, at the Congress of Vienna, gave her word to Switzerland that her neutrality should be respected; so that, as a matter of fact, the trustworthiness of international agreements in general is at stake. It seems hardly likely that any of the rival powers would be willing to incur the odium of being the first to break this engagement with a small but highly respected and useful state. Public opinion the world over would promptly turn against that nation ; and even Bismarck was forced to acknowledge that it is worth something to have the moral support of outsiders, in a great contest.

There is another consideration which would have weight in determining the conduct of the powers toward Swiss neutrality. As no one can suspect Switzerland of seeking territorial conquests or laying plans for self-aggrandizement, she has, in these days, become a centre for many international unions, and the powers have acquired the habit of referring some of their disputes to her for arbitration. This movement was inaugurated in 1864, by the memorable convention for the protection of the wounded, held in Geneva. Soon after that date, Bern was selected as the centre for the permanent administration of the International Telegraph Union; in 1871 followed the settlement of the Alabama Claims by a tribunal of arbitration assembled at Geneva, — an act which gave a wonderful moral impulse to the cause of international arbitration. Since then a number of central offices have been constituted at Bern, such as those for the International Postal Union, for the regulation of freight transport upon the Continent, and for the protection of industrial, literary, and artistic property. When we take into consideration that these international offices are the only ones in existence, except the purely scientific Bureau du Metre in Paris, it becomes evident how highly the use of this neutral meeting-ground is valued by the European powers, and how loath they would be to part with it.

The following significant words upon this subject occur in a report¹ made to the English government in 1885 by one of its agents abroad: “It is difficult, when passing through the quiet streets of Bern, to realize the importance of the operations which are being unobtrusively carried on, or the worldwide scope of the interests involved. Yet it cannot be doubted that these interests form a more effectual guarantee for the preservation of Switzerland as an independent state than any other that could be devised. . . . No one, finally, who has lived for even a few years in Switzerland, and has learnt to appreciate the practical good sense so largely prevailing in that energetic little country, will hesitate to rejoice at the destiny which now, more than ever before, seems assured to it, of retaining an honored place among the nations.”

It may be that the example of Switzerland is destined to accomplish great results in the world’s history, for, in truth, there are tremendous possibilities in this principle of perpetual neutrality. If I mistake not, it supplies a means of arriving at a semblance, if nothing better, of permanent international peace. There are at present several other neutral states, and it only remains for the powers to extend this privilege gradually to all the contested points on the map of Europe in order to make war unnecessary, and in time impossible. Belgium’s neutrality is guaranteed by England, and the little duchy of Luxembourg is also neutral territory, according to international treaty. It will be seen by looking into an atlas that, if Alsace-Lorraine could be declared neutral, there would be an unbroken band of neutral soil from Belgium to Switzerland, effectually shutting off all approach from France to Germany. Is it too much to expect sensible counsels to prevail yet awhile in this muchvexed question? If so, perhaps in a few years, when the two nations have begun to feel that the weight of their enormous armaments is too great for endurance, and have drunk to the depths the bitterness of this enforced peace, they will resort to some such compromise, rather than prolong an impossible situation. In other parts of Europe there are little independencies whose neutrality is carefully respected by the powers, such as San Marino in Italy, Andorra in Spain, Liechtenstein in Austria, and Monaco on the boundary between France and Italy; they are all witnesses to the fact that neutralities can be maintained even in the very midst of great nations. Only the other day, the powers united in a sort of joint protectorate over the Congo Basin, and established the principle of optional arbitration in cases of dispute; while England, Germany, and the United States have, since then, made certain agreements as regards the Samoan Islands. Think how the stability of peace would gain by the neutralization of such debatable ground as the Balkan peninsula and Egypt! Not long ago, it was proposed in the parliaments of Sweden and Denmark to labor for the perpetual neutralization of those two countries. And so the movement might grow, until all over the earth there would be neutral zones from which war would be ostracized as a thing unclean.

Look at Switzerland as she is even now. Does she not stand for a representation— on a small scale and imperfectly, it may be — of what poets and philosophers have pictured to themselves the world might some day become ? Is she not already, in her way, a miniature parliament of man? For she is not a national unit, like France or Spain, existing as such in spite of herself; the nucleus of the Swiss Confederation was perhaps formed by nature to be free and independent, but the outlying districts joined the Union of their own accord ; in other words, it is the will of the Swiss people and their fixed determination which keep them united. Consider the mixture of races and religions which they represent. Of the twenty-two cantons, thirteen are German speaking, four are French; in three German and French both are spoken, in one Italian, and in another Romansch. The population of German Switzerland is almost purely Teutonic; that of French Switzerland about half and half Teutonic and Celto-Roman; while Italian and Romansch Switzerland can boast of CeltoRoman, Ostro-Gothic, and even Etruscan elements. Some of these cantons are Protestant, others Roman Catholic, and others, again, have a mixed population of both faiths. If these incongruous, often antagonistic cantons can meet upon some common plane and conform to some common standard, can live side by side in peace and prosperity, surely the task of some day uniting the nations of the world upon a similar basis is not altogether hopeless and chimerical.

W. D. McCrackan.