By Matt Underwood Army chief says Switzerland can’t defend itself from full-scale attack, and it’s a statement that makes you pause and think, doesn’t it? Neutrality, that long-standing principle of Swiss foreign policy, has always been a fascinating balancing act. It works wonderfully, until someone decides to ignore it. The core of Switzerland’s security might actually lie less in repelling a land invasion and more in keeping the global banking system safe. After all, the Swiss are custodians of a vast amount of the world’s wealth.
Contributing meaningfully to the collective security of Europe would be a wise move for Switzerland. For ages, their safety has rested on the goodwill of their neighbors. Considering how Russia would need to overcome NATO to even get close, it makes you wonder if they’re willing to pay the massive costs of adequate defense when they can rely on others. It’s a bit like NATO protecting itself while simultaneously protecting Switzerland.
Switzerland’s approach to the Ukraine conflict was particularly interesting. Their business dealings with Russian oligarchs, many felt, were their primary protection. The problem with neutrality is that it loses its strength if there aren’t a few countries between you and your potential enemy.
The article mentions Switzerland’s plan to increase defense spending to approximately 1% of GDP by 2032. This is a considerable increase, but still well below the 5% that NATO countries generally aim for. And even with this ramp-up, the Swiss military may not be fully ready until around 2050. That timeline sounds rather relaxed, a bit too *mañana* for a military readiness plan, doesn’t it? Considering their defensive advantages, lack of much strategic value to potential invaders, and the worldwide interests of their banks, perhaps they think they can afford to take their time.
They do have a serious bunker mentality, and I wouldn’t underestimate it if you were trying to invade. They’ve got mandatory military service, and soldiers get to keep their guns after serving, stored separately from the ammunition. This is a very Swiss approach to defense. The question arises: Can Switzerland even feed its population if surrounding countries decided to blockade all access?
Remember the story of how the Swiss militia was asked what they would do if 1,000,000 trained Nazi soldiers crossed the Swiss border? Their reply: “We will all shoot twice then go home”. That’s a classic, right? But Switzerland has been surrounded by neighbors with no serious invasion plans for centuries. Their greatest defense might very well be the innate insufferability of their people. It’s hard to imagine Switzerland being on anyone’s invasion “bingo card” anytime soon.
There’s something ironic about seeing articles about Switzerland’s own army chief admitting they couldn’t withstand a full-scale assault. Armchair strategists rush to declare that Switzerland is easily defensible. It’s fascinating. You have to consider the fact that a modern military might easily walk over a less prepared country, but Switzerland would be a difficult place to test that theory.
The Ukraine-Russia conflict has morphed into a slow, trench-based, World War I-style struggle with bunkers, trenches, and small units engaging with drones. Switzerland has a massive bunker infrastructure that may not be fully utilized but could be quickly mobilized. A protracted war would be slow, painful, and it’s likely most individual NATO countries (excluding the U.S.) wouldn’t be able to establish quick enough air superiority.
Instead of fighting in the mountains, they’re talking about drones operating out of pre-built bunkers. And then there’s the question of how much Russian oligarch money is stashed there. It’s not the kind of thing you want to just throw out there. I can’t imagine their neighbors invading but I guess anything is possible nowadays. Also, aren’t they naturally defended by mountains? Why would Switzerland need to defend itself? They have so much dirt on so many world leaders. Switzerland would be a logistical nightmare to invade due to the terrain. Every able-bodied citizen is armed and trained. They have enough bunkers for their entire population.
They’ve always held the philosophy that the cost of invading and holding Swiss territory would not be worth the investment. Bunkers everywhere, an armed citizenry, and infrastructure rigged with explosives are all great deterrents. This makes you wonder if they have earned their neutrality by harboring key figures and their money.
Consider the scenario: if Russia conquered Switzerland’s neighbors, then the invasion becomes a possibility. But that’s a hypothetical. It’s a reminder that we all know the truth but can’t help but overplay our hand. Isn’t the entire country practically one giant bunker? Anyone trying to invade Switzerland would face a very long, bloody conflict.
So, who would attack Switzerland? Who would want to attack them besides cyber attackers? Switzerland is surrounded by its “bodyguards.” Their real threat isn’t a land invasion, it’s something less direct.
It’s a practical, rather pragmatic view of the situation. Who’s messing with the chocolate? The Swiss know that no one would want to invade for its hard-earned “prestige.”