At a time when diplomacy is being tested like never before—from the war in Ukraine to escalating tensions in the Middle East—Switzerland, a cornerstone of international mediation, now faces questions about its neutrality. Is the country still the diplomatic hub it once was? “It is in our DNA,” says Pascale Baeriswyl, the Swiss Ambassador to the UN in New York. In this exclusive interview for Envoy, she shares her insights on the evolving nature of diplomacy and the timeless debate: Geneva or New York? Beyond negotiations, she finds harmony in an unexpected place—her saxophone—bringing diplomats together at her residence over the warm and melting comfort of raclette cheese. In the end, whether through music or a shared meal, she says that “diplomacy is about bringing people together.”
Switzerland has long been known for its neutrality, but recent geopolitical shifts raised questions about whether this neutrality still holds, particularly following the Swiss alignment with EU sanctions on Russia. Does Switzerland still maintain its traditional stance of neutrality in global politics?
Yes, of course. Switzerland is a permanently neutral country based on international law, based on the 1907 Hague Conventions. This means Switzerland will not join any military alliance. However, this neutrality has never implied indifference to breaches of international law or human rights violations. Switzerland remains committed to defending international law and humanitarian law – and this has also been at the core of our mandate in the UN Security Council. The Russian military aggression against Ukraine was a significant breach of the UN Charter. Switzerland condemns this violation and asks for the respect of the Charter. As a multilateral actor, we have consistently adhered to UN sanctions. And when it comes to violations of international law, Switzerland has for several decades also often followed EU sanctions, each time, however, based on a sovereign decision by the Swiss government. The principle of neutrality does also not preclude us from expressing solidarity – with Ukrainians or any other people in the world. On the contrary, our constitution asks us to promote respect for human rights and democracy and the peaceful co-existence of peoples. Our commitment to these principles remains steadfast. So we are not out of the job when it comes to mediation efforts.
As the world becomes increasingly polarized, how does Switzerland maintain its relationships with key global actors, particularly the U.S., China, and Russia?
It is in our DNA, as a direct democracy, to talk to everyone, always, and to try to negotiate compromises at every level, starting with municipalities. It is the same at an international level: we are speaking with everyone, trying to build trust, promote respect, and build bridges. That is something we also tried to implement during our Security Council mandate, in particular during our two presidencies. Last October, during our Presidency, for example, I often asked countries to show mutual respect to each other at the beginning of a meeting. In these polarized times, we need some players who try to do exactly that, and in our experience that has mostly been the small and mid-sized countries. And in these challenging times, I hope very much that the big powers will also come back to the spirit of compromise and cooperation.
“When dealing with the Americans, Russians, or Chinese, do you find it easier to communicate with a particular country, or is it more difficult when engaging with each of these three?”
Diplomacy requires an understanding of different perspectives. Similar to music, where musicians need to have a common understanding of a song in order to be able to play together, diplomacy brings us together. Switzerland has a large number of embassies worldwide. This also helps us to understand positions in the respective countries. International law must serve as a guiding point in our interactions, like a compass. I have never found it difficult to have a common dialogue with any of those delegations. This doesn’t mean that we share their views or that we can’t be critical about some decisions another country may take.
What is Switzerland’s position on President Trump’s recent proposal for the U.S. to take over the Gaza Strip? Isn’t forcible resettlement a violation of international law, especially considering Switzerland’s strong defense of international law?
We do not comment on every remark that a president may make. But we are a strong defender of international law and international humanitarian law. During our mandate, we have been “holding this line” in every declaration or negotiation, and we will continue to do so after having left the Council.
Switzerland is the host country for the World Health Organization. What is your take on the U.S. withdrawal from the WHO under the Trump presidency?
As a host country, we try to support all the organizations working in Geneva, and that is true for the World Health Organization, as well as for all the others. We believe that the World Health Organization makes an important contribution to improving health worldwide. The pandemic showed how important it is for countries to work together. Therefore, we will certainly continue engaging with and supporting the WHO in doing its job.
With one of the biggest powers in the world withdrawing from the WHO, do you think any other country could replace the U.S.? Additionally, given the criticism from the current U.S. president, should the WHO reflect on this criticism, and do you believe it needs to make some changes?
Again, I would not comment on any specific statements. But it is of course true that all international and multilateral institutions must constantly evolve and adapt to the changing world and my country supports them in doing so.
Switzerland completed its first-ever term on the UN Security Council in 2023-2024. Can you share your most memorable moment representing Switzerland at the Security Council? Conversely, was there a moment when you felt frustrated or powerless in the Council?
There were moments of light and there were moments of darkness. Let me give you a few examples. Last August, we invited the Security Council members to Geneva to recommit to the Geneva Conventions, 75 years after their adoption. The Foreign Minister of Sierra Leone – sharing his story as a former child soldier – told us that he had literally been saved by international humanitarian law and the ICRC, an institution based in Geneva. That was a strong moment. On another topic, we worked very hard with the ten elected members for a ceasefire in Gaza and managed to pass the first ceasefire resolution in March 2024. Although it was not implemented at that time, we did not give up and continued our efforts to achieve a ceasefire. To see it finally come true was a moment of happiness, even if it came much too late and we were not on the Council anymore. Additionally, we were also very active regarding a better implementation of the Women, Peace, and Security agenda, including holding a first-ever open debate at the highest level, chaired by our president last October. Our two presidencies included numerous civil society representatives, all women. I co-led the Security Council visit to Colombia with two female colleagues and worked extensively with female members of the Council. We also brought the African Union and the UN Security Council together for a historic retreat, focusing on climate security, peacekeeping in Africa, and youth.
And, last but certainly not least, we passed a resolution for better protection of humanitarian aid. UN personnel, which is particularly important since 2024 was the deadliest year for them ever. It received significant outside support – 115 countries followed our call – and now needs implementation. Having a Council that can prevent and react to world crises is crucial for us. That it was often blocked was frustrating, but it also pushed us to work harder to ensure it could fulfill its mandate. So, we can say that it was not for lack of trying. And that’s what we should all continue to do.
Was there a particular reason Switzerland was not represented on the Security Council until 2023-2024, considering that this was your first time on the Council?
Switzerland is the only country in the world that joined the United Nations through a democratic vote. It therefore took us longer. And for the Security Council mandate, we prepared meticulously to be able to be an active member.
We especially had to prove that during our second presidency last October. It was historic because it had a very high number of meetings amidst strong geopolitical tensions. We tried to achieve consensus on as many occasions as possible, issuing press declarations and adopting resolutions. Notably, we introduced the first presidential statement on science diplomacy and showcased innovation through exhibitions using artificial intelligence. We tried to balance tradition with modernity and innovation.
If you could change one thing about the way diplomacy is conducted at the United Nations, what would it be?
For many years, we have worked to improve the Council’s working methods. A key priority is to prevent vetoes in the worst situations, such as genocide, crimes against humanity, and serious violations of international law. To date, we have secured 150 countries to a code of conduct that pledges not to oppose resolutions aimed at preventing atrocity crimes. If I could change one thing, I would make sure that this initiative gains universal support and that vetoes are no longer used to block action against such crimes.
As the UN faces increasing challenges, from conflicts to climate change what must change for the UN to remain relevant?
The UN is turning 80 and, like any aging entity, or person, needs constant reform to stay effective and relevant. Numerous reform efforts should be implemented, and the Pact for the Future must be enacted promptly. Nevertheless, the United Nations is the only place where all countries can come together. Currently, many global challenges require international cooperation, as no single country can solve them alone. A platform for collaborative efforts is essential to ensure a sustainable planet for future generations. Presently, geopolitical tensions make it difficult for major powers to find common ground. It is therefore important for all nations to encourage dialogue and collaboration, fostering a spirit of compromise to address these issues collectively.
I like your characterization of the UN as the “old man.” Is it the “sick man” among international organizations, given that it is turning 80?
I didn’t say “man,” I said “old person.” But I could have said “man” since after 80 years we urgently need a female Secretary-General. But with age also comes wisdom. I think the UN personifies both—it is 80 years old, but also has 80 years of wisdom. Now, we need to add the spirit of a young woman. If we can bring wisdom and youth together and reform the organization, then I think the UN has a bright future. If you look back at history, one can abolish an organization; the League of Nations ceased to exist. But then, after the Second World War, a new organization with similar features had to be founded, because multilateralism rules is natural when more than two countries want to share the planet. So, we actually have a wonderful Charter. And there are many parts of the Charter that are uncontested, that’s what gives me hope. But of course, we have to make sure that the entirety of the Charter, along with its visionary spirit, is implemented. It is not a menu from which you can select only what you like.
I think the UN personifies both—it is 80 years old, but also has 80 years of wisdom. Now, we need to add the spirit of a young woman.
Can the UN survive without reforms?
It needs reforms. And I believe we can reform it.
Is multilateral diplomacy still working or is it losing its effectiveness?
Multilateral diplomacy involves collaboration among individuals to identify solutions, which is fundamental to the multilateral system. There is no viable alternative. It is imperative that we return to a spirit of compromise and mutual respect. However, we must acknowledge that we operate in a world where technologies advance rapidly, influencing diverse practices. For multilateral diplomacy to be effective, it is essential to integrate these modern developments into our methodologies to address the challenges we face.
Neutrality has never implied indifference to breaches of international law or human rights violations.
When we think of Switzerland, Davos and the World Economic Forum often come to mind as key gathering places for global leaders. Does Davos still have the same impact it once did?
Davos is a place where the private sector comes together with policymakers. When we look at the world, with more than 120 conflicts, with the need to build states and implement good governance, this cannot be done without the private sector playing a role. We also need the private sector to help implement the Agenda 2030 and the Sustainable Development Goals. The World Economic Forum in Davos is a place where the private sector and policymakers talk, and it remains essential.
As an alpine nation, Switzerland is witnessing the melting of its glaciers at an alarming rate. How is climate change altering Switzerland’s iconic landscapes, and what role is Switzerland playing in the international community to address climate change?
Our glaciers are melting before our eyes. In the Alps, they have been retreating at an accelerating rate since 1980. Since 1850, glaciers have lost more than 65 percent of their volume. If global warming continues, by the end of the 21st century only a fraction of the current glacier cover will remain, with major consequences for the seasonal availability of water for drinking, agriculture, and energy production. As a member state, Switzerland is engaged in the relevant international global forums, whether in the context of the Paris Agreement or the Global Platform for Disaster Risk Reduction, a global forum that Switzerland will host in Geneva in June 2025.
We also co-chaired the Climate Security Group in the Security Council. We introduced several resolutions to try to strengthen climate security advice in fragile situations. Last December, the Council made its first-ever climate crisis trip to Nigeria, led by Mozambique and Switzerland, to see the relationship between the risks of a climate crisis and the risks of increased conflict. We also have a development cooperation that is very strong in fragile, vulnerable countries when it comes to climate change. I think we need to align what we are doing in our own country with what we are trying to do in other countries through our development cooperation.
As a diplomat, are you optimistic about the state of global diplomacy? What gives you hope?
As diplomats, our personal feelings are not as relevant. We represent countries and must be leaders of hope for younger generations. To this end, we invited many young civil society leaders to the Council, who were very competent, including impressive women, many from the African continent. A new generation is emerging that will need to collaborate and lead us into the future, and it is our responsibility to support them. It is important to recognize that many aspects of the international system, from postal services to air travel, function smoothly because they are uncontested. Therefore, we must work together.
More on a personal note—diplomacy can be a difficult field, often involving heated discussions among the world’s diplomats. Do you have a coping mechanism for handling frustration? Is there something from your personal life that you also apply to diplomacy?
Music is my passion, and I try to bring people together through it. Annually, we organize a boat tour for new ambassadors and form a band with colleagues who can play or sing. As a saxophone player, I host jazz sessions every Sunday at my residence during the ‘blue hour’, playing blues and improvising with ‘blue notes’. Music helps me cope with work challenges, such as those faced in the Security Council, so I play the blues every Sunday evening.
Today’s world, as previously discussed, is a tough one. It can make you bitter. I think that a little sweetness in such a challenging world can never be a bad thing. And, yes, we have been working a lot on including culinary aspects—chocolate as a sweetener, but also raclette cheese. It is a very nice way to bring people together and share moments. Diplomacy is about coming together, engaging in discussions, exchanging thoughts, and perhaps planting a seed that can later blossom into a beautiful and successful initiative.
It is in our DNA, as a direct democracy, to talk to everyone, always, and to try to negotiate compromises at every level.
About The Author
