Those who want to fight war with war have not understood that they have already lost. War can only be contained and reduced by means of conflict refusal. Neutrality is an active form of conflict refusal and one of the best methods of conflict resolution. Neutrality does not, as some claim, stand for "isolation" or "isolationism". On the contrary: the neutrality initiative obliges Switzerland on the one hand not to join belligerent military alliances and on the other hand to actively engage in conflict resolution. Both are primarily in the interests of the world's poorest and weakest.

Because one thing is clear: in all wars, it is always those affected by poverty who suffer the most, while arms companies and their shareholders make massive profits. This also applies to the Ukraine war, in which the Ukrainian and Russian people are bleeding each other dry, while the military-industrial complex of the belligerent and warmongering states grows and grows. With every escalation, more armaments are in demand, deadly equipment is sold and huge profits are made. In short: wars bring death to many and huge profits to big business. We on the left and the Greens cannot and will not support this.

For example, it is right and important that Switzerland does not export weapons to war zones or allow the re-export of war material, because this would only lead to us helping one working class to kill another working class. Instead of differentiating between "good" and "evil" in wars, Switzerland must work to curb war as an evil in itself and this is the core of the neutrality initiative.

The correct response to war abroad is not to align with one side or the other for ideological reasons - that only makes the situation worse - but to help alleviate the horror caused by war. Supporting the Red Cross, offering good offices, attempting mediation, and caring for refugees regardless of which side they come from are the right responses to violence abroad. The neutrality initiative builds on these humanitarian traditions and wants to write them into the constitution.

One of the most important principles of medicine must also apply to foreign policy: "Primum non nocere, secundum cavere, tertium sanare" - first do no harm, second be careful, third heal. An integral neutrality that ensures that we reject the logic of war is the best way to ensure that we follow this guiding principle and do not help to harm the other side by participating in the conflict. It also ensures that we behave cautiously and do not back one side in the heat of media coverage or emotional images, which we would regret afterwards. And, last but not least, it helps us to help, because only those who remain verifiably politically neutral have a chance of helping the warring states to escape the spiral of violence as mediators and confidants for all sides - or at least to alleviate the suffering a little.

It is exactly the same with sanctions, because they are just as much a weapon of war as bombs, bullets and guns. The aim of sanctions is to decimate or even destroy economic sectors in other countries and thereby cause suffering in the target population so that they turn against their own governments. It is a perfidious game to want to feed suffering in other populations so that they do what we want them to do. The whole idea of sanctions is built on colonial great power thinking. We, with our powerful economy, can and may threaten, dominate or even destroy foreign economies if we deem it "just". From a left-wing perspective, this cannot be approved of under any circumstances.

Furthermore, sanctions almost never lead to regime change or an adjustment of national policies. North Korea has been sanctioned since 1950, Cuba since 1962, Iran since 1979, Russia since 2014, the list goes on and on, and all these sanctions do is promote impoverishment and suffering among the working class.

Apart from the fact that the times are long gone when Europe - let alone Switzerland - can destroy other economies, such brutal methods of economic policy should not simply be part of the basic repertoire of our state. Just as armed force is only acceptable under international law in very few cases - only in self-defence - methods of economic warfare should only be used in absolutely exceptional cases and only if they are decided by the UN Security Council in accordance with international law. In all other cases, we should carefully remember the principle of "first do no harm".