First polling points to Swiss rejection of tougher neutrality

54 percent of voters reject the neutrality initiative, putting Switzerland’s most cherished foreign-policy doctrine on course for a serious referendum defeat. The first SRG SSR poll gives the proposal 42 percent support, 54 percent opposition and just 4 percent undecided ahead of the September 27 vote. A separate Tamedia survey is even more damaging: 62 percent oppose the initiative, compared with 36 percent in favour.

The numbers deliver an immediate warning to the campaign led by Pro Suisse, the pro-sovereignty organisation that gathered enough signatures to force a national vote. Its plan would anchor a rigid definition of Swiss neutrality in the constitution, limiting Bern’s ability to respond to future crises.

That question has become urgent since Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. Switzerland still sees itself as a neutral, well-armed state, but its decision to align with European Union sanctions against Moscow has exposed a widening fault line: is neutrality a shield against military involvement, or a ban on meaningful political action?

For now, the electorate appears to favour room for manoeuvre. But the campaign is only beginning, and the undecided minority could still shape the final result.

The initiative would lock “armed and perpetual” neutrality into Switzerland’s constitution—and sharply narrow Bern’s choices abroad. Its language demands that neutrality apply “permanently and without exception”. It would block Switzerland from building closer ties with NATO and rule out military alliances except in the event of an attack.

The most consequential restriction concerns sanctions. Under the proposal, Switzerland would be barred from imposing economic penalties unless the United Nations called for them. That would make the country’s recent alignment with EU sanctions against Russia far harder, if not impossible, to repeat.

Supporters argue that this is precisely the point. They say Switzerland must restore a clear, permanent doctrine rather than drift into the foreign-policy orbit of larger powers. The initiative has also won praise from Moscow, which has repeatedly criticised Bern for backing sanctions against Russia.

Opponents see a dangerous constitutional straitjacket. The government and parliament argue that the text is dogmatic and would weaken Switzerland’s security and diplomatic flexibility during a period of escalating geopolitical tension. The result will test whether voters want neutrality defined by restraint—or preserved as a flexible instrument of national independence.

The map reveals a divided Switzerland: Italian-speaking voters back tougher neutrality, while German-speaking voters drive the rejection. In Italian-speaking Switzerland, 55 percent support the initiative—the only language region where approval currently leads. French-speaking voters lean against it, with 49 percent opposed, 43 percent in favour and 8 percent undecided. German-speaking Switzerland is more decisive: 57 percent intend to vote no.

The urban-rural divide is equally striking. Nearly six in ten city voters favour retaining the current approach, while suburban voters are almost perfectly split—49 percent support versus 48 percent opposition. Rural areas give the initiative a narrow majority.

Age and education deepen the contrast. Every age group currently leans towards rejection, but opposition peaks among voters aged 65 and over at 60 percent. Education produces an almost reversed pattern: 59 percent of voters with lower formal education support the initiative, while 58 percent of university-educated voters oppose it.

These divisions point to a campaign fought not only over foreign policy, but also over identity, geography and trust in institutions. The final result may depend on whether supporters can turn regional enthusiasm into a national majority.

Ignazio Cassis is defending an active neutrality designed to engage with the world—not retreat from it. Addressing Swiss ambassadors, the foreign minister rejected the idea that neutrality requires silence or isolation. “Neutrality does not mean inaction or withdrawal from the world,” he said, describing it instead as “an instrument in the service of the country’s freedom, security and independence.”

That argument has become the government’s central defence. Switzerland’s traditional neutrality traces its roots to 1516 and has enjoyed international recognition since 1815, but its meaning has never been detached from national security and diplomacy. Ministers and parliamentarians warn that a rigid constitutional formula could prevent Bern from adapting when threats cross borders or when international law demands a response.

Nearly all major political parties oppose the initiative. The exception is the right-wing Swiss People’s Party, Switzerland’s largest political force, which has been closely associated with the proposal from the outset. Its campaign frames neutrality as a sovereign red line and sanctions as unacceptable alignment with foreign blocs.

The clash is now clear: one side wants neutrality permanently fixed; the other wants it preserved while keeping Switzerland agile. That choice will define the referendum’s final weeks.

The neutrality vote looks increasingly one-sided, but the second referendum on the ballot remains a genuine cliffhanger. The “For Secure Food” initiative records 47 percent support and 49 percent opposition, a margin too narrow to call. It seeks greater food self-sufficiency and policies that promote the production and consumption of plant-based food.

Its coalition crosses environmental and civil-society groups, yet every major political party recommends rejection. Their voters are not following instructions uniformly. Support reaches 84 percent among Greens, 64 percent among Social Democratic voters and 55 percent among Green Liberals. Among Radical-Liberal supporters, nearly 70 percent plan to vote no.

The food proposal also exposes a different national divide. French-speaking voters support it by 57 percent, and Italian-speaking voters by 53 percent; German-speaking Switzerland is more sceptical, with 53 percent opposed. Women support it at 55 percent, while 56 percent of men reject it. Younger voters are more receptive: 54 percent of those aged 18 to 39 back the measure.

With voting still weeks away, the neutrality initiative faces a steep climb while food policy remains volatile. Switzerland’s September ballot could therefore deliver one clear verdict—and one late surge.