The roundtable “Lessons from Swiss Neutrality: Trustbuilding and Dialogue in the Western Balkans” explored how Switzerland’s experience in neutrality can inform peacebuilding and reconciliation in the region.

Switzerland’s long-standing tradition of neutrality has shaped its global role in diplomacy, mediation, and peacebuilding. This roundtable examined how the core principles of Swiss neutrality – credibility, discretion, and inclusivity – can support reconciliation and institution-building efforts in the Western Balkans. Participants discussed how neutrality, as both a value and operational practice, can help build trust, facilitate dialogue, and strengthen resilience in divided societies.

The session also considered how adaptable the Swiss model is to the current political and social realities of the region. Key questions included: What makes Swiss neutrality a credible and sustainable peacebuilding model? How can its principles be applied to Western Balkan dynamics? What lessons from Switzerland’s mediation and “good offices” can support regional dialogue? Where are the limits of neutrality in deeply polarized environments, and how can they be managed? And how can neutral facilitation contribute to rebuilding trust and strengthening institutional resilience across the region?

Jean-Daniel Ruch, former Ambassador of Switzerland to Serbia, spoke about the Swiss model of neutrality and its foundations. He emphasized that neutrality is not the same as non-alignment, but rather the outcome of specific historical circumstances faced by countries positioned between major powers. He highlighted the importance of neutrality being recognized by others and noted that Switzerland was fortunate to have its neutrality acknowledged more than 200 years ago.

Throughout the discussion, Ruch explored how Serbia could potentially integrate elements of the Swiss model. He pointed to student protests as an example of direct diplomacy in action. He also noted that Serbia’s position, situated between four major powers, could be leveraged as a strategic advantage—but doing so requires flexibility and significant resource investment. One remark that drew particular attention was his suggestion that the next Trump-Putin meeting could be held at Sava Centar.

Alexandra Matas, Director of the International Security Dialogue Department at the Geneva Centre for Security Policy, stressed that today’s polarized world urgently needs “bridgemakers.” She emphasized that neutrality is not passivity; on the contrary, successful neutrality requires proactive engagement. Neutral countries act as facilitators, maintain backchannel communications, and do whatever is necessary to keep dialogue alive. Addressing audience questions, she highlighted the distinction between mediation, negotiation, and dialogue facilitation. She also sparked debate by suggesting that Serbia could potentially pursue both neutrality and EU accession simultaneously.

Nicolas Ramseier, President and Co-Founder of the Geneva Center for Neutrality, discussed the prerequisites for successful neutrality. He highlighted the importance of internal stability, a strong reputation, and historical credibility. Ramseier suggested that Serbia could benefit more from being a partner to the EU rather than a full member, describing this approach as “not putting all your eggs in one basket.” He envisioned Serbia as a potential diplomatic powerhouse, equipped with the tools to achieve this if the government chooses that path. On the ethical dimensions of neutrality, he stressed the need for consistent criteria and prioritizing actions that benefit the broader international community.

Moderator Lejla Mazić concluded the session by emphasizing that neutrality is a social necessity. She argued that with sufficient resources, reputation, independence, political will, and support grounded in facts and history, neutrality could become a viable reality in the Balkans.