A delicate mandate: Foreign Minister Ignazio Cassis and his Iranian counterpart Abbas Araghtschi in Geneva in February.Image: keystone
analysis
Switzerland represents the interests of the USA in Iran. After the outbreak of war, politicians demanded the abandonment of this protective power mandate. Delicate questions also arise about neutrality.
Mar 5, 2026, 4:21 p.mMar 5, 2026, 4:21 p.m
There is no end in sight to Israel’s and the USA’s air war against Iran. This poses problems for Switzerland, starting with the around 5,200 travelers who are stuck in the crisis region. The EDA Department of Foreign Affairs does not feel responsible for their return. You would have to assume their personal responsibilityit was said on Wednesday.
“Stay where you are,” Marianne Jenni, the head of the Consular Directorate, told the media to block tourists in Abu Dhabi, Doha and Dubai. Some of them complained about the lack of help from Bern are actually questionable. And yet the impression remains that the EDA is making things too easy for itself.
The Iran War in Pictures
Close your eyes and push through, seems to be the motto of Foreign Minister Ignazio Cassis and his department. It is hoped that the war will end quickly and normality will return. If this is not the case, Switzerland could be drawn into the vortex. Because the war becomes a twofold dilemma for them:
Protecting power mandate
Switzerland has represented the interests of the USA in Iran since 1980. They broke off relations with the Islamic Republic after the occupation of their embassy. The term protecting power mandate used for this is a bit exaggerated: Switzerland carries out consular tasks and keeps the communication channel between the two governments open.
It’s not a mediator’s role, more like a postman’s role. Such mandates are for Switzerland Part of their good offices. With the outbreak of war, however, there were political demands to give up the mandate. The good offices are “actually very poor service to the Iranian people”said former Mitte President Gerhard Pfister to Radio SRF.
Solothurn SP Councilor of States Franziska Roth describes the protective power mandate as the “main reason for Switzerland’s silence on the brutal mullahs’ regime”. For Roth, this includes foregoing the EU sanctions following the massacres of protesters in January. The SP had harshly criticized the Federal Council for this.
Exiled Iranians demonstrated in front of the embassy in Bern during the protests in January.Image: keystone
The FDFA has the good offices too often “used as an excuse to avoid having to take a position”admits the NZZ, which otherwise defends the mandate. The problem worsens with the war. “We are the postman between two breakout bullies,” blasphemed a national councilor. But there are also voices that warn against abandonment.
For the department itself, this is “a hypothetical question,” they say behind closed doors. Everything depends on what happens next. If there is a regime change in Tehran, the mandate will no longer be necessary as both countries will likely return to normal relations. However, if things get worse, it may be “more necessary than ever”.
The question arises as to whether Israel and the USA pursue the same goals. While the Israelis hope for regime change came from Donald Trump and his administration rather opposite signals. The Iranian opposition is therefore “in a tight spot”. For Switzerland, this can only mean one thing: wait and see.
neutrality
The second dilemma concerns our “sacred cow”, neutrality. Although Switzerland tries to stay out of it, it could still be indirectly involved in the war. “If the Iran war lasts longer or even expands, the Federal Council would have to apply neutrality law towards the USA,” reported Radio SRF.
US military aircraft at Ramstein Air Force Base in Germany.Image: keystone
On the one hand, this concerns the overflights of American military aircraft. As a neutral state, Switzerland would have to close its airspace, as it had done before the Iraq War broke out in 2003. However, the USA seems to be solving the problem on its own: According to the “Tages-Anzeiger”, US aircraft are flying around Switzerland since the beginning of the war.
The second point could be more tricky: Switzerland would have to stop exporting war material to the USA. They are the second most important customer after Germany. Apparently the Swiss authorities are already showing restraint “in the areas relevant to maintaining neutrality,” the State Secretariat for Economic Affairs (SECO) told the SRF.
That would only be logical. Finally, SECO banned other countries from passing on military equipment to Ukraine, which was attacked by Russia, with reference to the law of neutrality. And in the current case, it is the USA that started the war together with Israel. However, a delivery stop could lead to new friction with the moody US President.
The FDFA relies on the principle of hope. “It is currently not possible to assess whether the escalation in the Middle East meets the requirements for the application of neutrality law,” the SRF said. The Geneva international law professor Robert Kolb contradicted this in the NZZ: Given the intensity of the fighting the law of neutrality already applies now.
The longer the conflict lasts, the more difficult it becomes to “sit out” it. This will have an impact on the debate about the neutrality initiative launched by SVP doyen Christoph Blocher. The war could give it a boost, but for its opponents the dilemmas would be evidence that Switzerland must apply its neutrality flexibly.
The National Council discussed the initiative on Wednesday and Thursday. He leaned her just as clearly as a counterproposalwhile the Council of States supported one. The business should be settled in the spring session. The referendum would take place in September. By then the Iran war will – hopefully – be over.