Hey everyone, welcome back to My Weird Prompts. I am Corn, and I am joined as always by my brother, the man who probably has a secret Swiss bank account just for his rare book collection, Herman Poppleberry.
I wish, Corn. Though honestly, a Swiss bank account these days is less about secrecy and more about negative interest rates and a lot of paperwork. But you are not far off with the Swiss theme. Our housemate Daniel sent us a really fascinating prompt this morning while we were having coffee.
Yeah, Daniel was asking about the concept of good offices in diplomacy. We have touched on this before, especially when we talked about back-channel diplomacy in episode four hundred seventeen, but he wants to go deeper. Specifically, why is Switzerland the undisputed heavyweight champion of being the middleman? Is it just about being neutral, or is there something more calculated going on?
It is such a great question because most people just hear the word neutrality and think it means sitting on the sidelines. But in the world of international relations, Swiss neutrality is an active, high-stakes service. It is a product they export, essentially.
Right, and Daniel also asked the cynical question, which I love. What is in it for them? Is there a quid pro quo? Because let us be real, nothing in global politics is ever truly free. So, Herman, let us start with the basics. When we say good offices, what are we actually talking about in a legal or technical sense?
So, the term good offices is actually a formal diplomatic concept. It is one step below mediation. If you are mediating, you are actively suggesting solutions and trying to broker a deal. If you are providing good offices, you are essentially providing the room, the coffee, and the secure communication line. You are the facilitator. You are saying, look, you two clearly hate each other and cannot talk directly, so talk through us.
It is like being the mutual friend who passes notes between two people who just went through a messy breakup.
Exactly. But on a state level, this often takes the form of what is called a protecting power mandate. This is governed by the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations of nineteen sixty-one. If Country A and Country B break off diplomatic relations, they can ask a third country, Country C, to look after their interests. As of early twenty-twenty-six, Switzerland currently holds eight of these mandates. They represent the United States in Iran, which they have done since nineteen eighty. They represent Iran in Canada and also in Egypt. They represent Russia in Georgia and vice versa. And just in the last two years, they have taken on new roles representing Mexico in Ecuador and Ecuador in Mexico, as well as Ecuador in Venezuela.
Wait, so when we say they represent the United States in Iran, does that mean there is a Swiss diplomat in Tehran literally handling American citizen issues?
Yes, precisely. There is a Foreign Interests Section in the Swiss Embassy in Tehran. If an American citizen gets in trouble in Iran, it is the Swiss diplomats who go to the prison, who check on them, who facilitate communication with their families. They are the physical bridge between two countries that officially do not acknowledge each other’s existence. In fact, in June twenty-twenty-five, when tensions between Iran and Israel spiked, Switzerland actually had to temporarily evacuate its embassy staff for safety, but they made a point of stating that they would continue to fulfill that U-S mandate through remote channels. They never truly quit the job.
That is wild. But why Switzerland? I mean, Sweden is neutral. Austria is neutral. Ireland is neutral. Why does Switzerland get the lion's share of this business?
It goes back to eighteen fifteen, the Congress of Vienna. After the Napoleonic Wars, the Great Powers of Europe decided that a neutral Switzerland was in everyone's best interest. It served as a geographic buffer. But the Swiss took that mandate and turned it into a national identity. They realized that if they were useful to everyone, they were safe from everyone.
That is the insurance policy angle Daniel was asking about, right?
Absolutely. Think about it. If you are a major power and you are planning an invasion, you might think twice if that country is the only way you can talk to your other enemies or manage your overseas assets. During World War Two, Switzerland was representing the interests of over thirty-five different countries with around two hundred separate mandates. They were the clearinghouse for the world's diplomatic problems while the world was on fire.
So it is not just about being nice. It is about being indispensable. But let us talk about the culture of it. Daniel mentioned discretion and privacy. We always associate Switzerland with secret bank accounts, though as you said, that has changed a lot. Does that culture of silence bleed into their diplomacy?
Oh, one hundred percent. The Swiss diplomatic corp is legendary for its discretion. In other countries, a diplomat might want to leak a success to the press to get a promotion or help their political party. But the Swiss system is different. They have a collegiate government, a seven-member Federal Council that rotates the presidency every year. There is no single big boss looking for a legacy or a headline. It is a very stable, very quiet bureaucracy.
That makes sense. If I am the United States and I want to send a secret message to the Iranians about a prisoner swap, I do not want it on the front page of the New York Times the next day. I want it to go through someone whose entire national brand is built on keeping their mouth shut.
Right. And there is also the expertise. Dealing with these mandates is incredibly complex. You have to understand the legal systems of both countries, the sensitivities, the history. The Swiss have been doing this for over a century. They have the institutional memory. When a new conflict pops up, like the diplomatic break between Mexico and Ecuador in twenty-twenty-four, they do not have to learn how to be a protecting power from scratch. They have a playbook that has been refined since the eighteen hundreds.
Okay, so they have the history, the culture, and the legal framework. But let us get to the quid pro quo. Daniel asked if they get anything in return. Beyond just not being invaded, are there economic or political perks to being the world's middleman?
It is a bit of a paradox. Officially, Switzerland does not charge for these services. They often even cover some of the administrative costs themselves. But the return on investment is massive in terms of soft power.
Soft power is such a fuzzy term, though. How does that translate into something real for a Swiss citizen?
Think about market access. If you are the country that is helping the United States and Iran talk, or helping Russia and Georgia manage their borders, you have incredible access to the top levels of government in those countries. When a Swiss trade delegation goes to Washington or Tehran, doors open because of the diplomatic debt those countries owe to Switzerland. It gives a tiny landlocked country of eight million people the geopolitical weight of a much larger power. It also keeps the Swiss Franc as a premier safe-haven currency because the world knows Switzerland is the last place that will ever be cut off from the global system.
So it is about leverage. If the United States is thinking about imposing a tariff that might hurt Swiss watches or chemicals, there is a diplomat in the room who can gently remind them, hey, remember that we are currently looking after your citizens in three different hostile countries? Maybe we can find a compromise on this tariff.
Exactly. It is rarely a direct trade, like we will do this if you do that. It is more about creating a reservoir of goodwill that they can tap into. Plus, it makes Switzerland the natural home for international organizations. The United Nations is in Geneva, the World Trade Organization, the World Health Organization. All of that brings in billions of dollars in economic activity and thousands of high-paying jobs.
It is a whole ecosystem. But I wonder if that ecosystem is under threat. Daniel asked if other countries are starting to fulfill this function. We have seen Qatar playing a huge role lately, especially with the Taliban and the hostage negotiations in Gaza. Norway is also very active. Is the Swiss monopoly ending?
That is the most interesting part of the prompt for me. We are definitely seeing a shift toward what I would call strategic intermediaries. Switzerland is the generalist. They are the gold standard for long-term, stable, legalistic representation. But if you need someone to talk to a non-state actor like Hamas or the Taliban, Switzerland might not be the best fit because they strictly adhere to international law and state-to-state relations.
Right, whereas a country like Qatar has spent the last two decades deliberately building relationships with groups that the West considers terrorists. They have created a different kind of good offices, one that is more about political agility than legal neutrality.
Precisely. Qatar's role is much more active. They are not just passing notes; they are hosting the leadership of these groups and actively trying to shape the outcome. It is a much riskier game than the Swiss play. If a negotiation fails or a group they are hosting does something horrific, Qatar takes a lot of heat. Switzerland, by being more passive and legalistic, avoids that blowback.
But even for Switzerland, the concept of neutrality is getting harder to maintain, isn't it? I am thinking about the war in Ukraine. Switzerland adopted European Union sanctions against Russia. That was a huge deal. It felt like they were finally picking a side.
It was a massive turning point. In fact, Russia officially designated Switzerland an unfriendly state in twenty-twenty-two. Moscow even rejected a Swiss offer to represent Ukrainian interests in Russia, specifically because they said Switzerland is no longer neutral. Then, in June twenty-twenty-four, Switzerland hosted a high-profile Summit on Peace in Ukraine at the Bürgenstock resort. Russia was not even invited, which they used as further proof that the Swiss brand of neutrality is dead. That is a direct hit to the Swiss diplomatic business model.
So if Russia does not see them as neutral, they lose that mandate. And if they lose enough of those mandates, their whole special status in the world starts to crumble.
That is the fear in Bern right now. There is actually a major political movement in Switzerland called the Neutrality Initiative. They are pushing for a national vote, likely later this year in twenty-twenty-six, to write a very strict, perpetual, and armed neutrality directly into the constitution. They want to prevent the government from ever joining non-military sanctions again, specifically to win back that trust from countries like Russia and China.
It is like the world is becoming too polarized for the old version of Swiss neutrality to work. If the world splits into two clear blocs again, like the Cold War but maybe even more intense, can a middleman even exist?
It is harder, for sure. But here is the thing, even in the most polarized times, you still need a mailbox. During the Cold War, the Swiss were busier than ever. The more two sides hate each other, the more they need a neutral party to handle the basics, like prisoner exchanges or communicating during a crisis to avoid accidental nuclear war.
That is a good point. Maybe the demand for good offices actually goes up when the world gets more dangerous. But maybe the providers change. You mentioned Qatar, but what about Oman? Or even Turkey?
Oman is a fascinating example. They have been the quiet bridge between the West and Iran for years. They are often the ones who facilitate the actual secret meetings, while the Swiss handle the formal paperwork. And Turkey has been trying to play both sides of the Ukraine conflict, hosting grain deal talks and prisoner swaps. But Turkey is a member of N-A-T-O, so they can never be truly neutral in the way Switzerland is.
So Switzerland still has that unique selling point of not being in any military alliance. They are not in N-A-T-O, they are not in the European Union, though they are very closely tied to it. They are the only major European country that is truly unaligned.
Exactly. And that lack of alignment is incredibly rare. Most countries that call themselves neutral are either too small to matter or are actually leaning quite heavily toward one side. Switzerland has the size, the wealth, and the history to make their neutrality credible, even if it is currently under strain.
I want to go back to something Daniel asked about how it operates in practice. We talked about the Interests Section in Tehran. But what about the day-to-day? Is it just diplomats in suits, or is there a more technical side to it?
It is very technical. Think about things like maritime law. If a ship from a country with no diplomatic relations gets seized, who handles the legal filings? Or if a student needs their transcripts verified from a hostile country? The Swiss protecting power handles all of that. They have teams of lawyers and administrators who basically act as a ghost embassy. It is not glamorous work. It is a lot of filing, a lot of stamps, a lot of verifying signatures.
It sounds like being a high-end concierge service for countries that are not on speaking terms.
That is actually a great analogy. It is a white-glove service. And because the Swiss are so good at it, other countries are often happy to let them keep the monopoly. Why would you want to set up your own neutral diplomatic service when you can just hire the experts?
But if I am a country like Brazil or India, and I am trying to increase my global influence, wouldn't I want to start offering these services? We talk a lot about the rise of the Global South. Could we see a country like Brazil become the Switzerland of the twenty-first century?
Brazil has tried! They have a very proud diplomatic tradition and they often try to mediate. But to be a successful intermediary, you need two things: you need to be perceived as neutral, and you need to be perceived as stable. Brazil's internal politics can be a bit of a rollercoaster, which makes some countries nervous about trusting them with long-term mandates.
Stability is key. You do not want your protecting power to have a coup or a radical change in government every four years. You want the same quiet, boring bureaucrats you have had for decades.
Exactly. That is the Swiss secret sauce. They are consistently, reliably boring. And in diplomacy, boring is a feature, not a bug.
So, looking ahead, does Switzerland stay on top? Or do we see a more fragmented world where different regions have their own middlemen?
I think we are moving toward a tiered system. For the formal, legalistic stuff—the protecting power mandates, the Interests Sections—Switzerland will likely remain the leader. But for the high-stakes political mediation, we are going to see more regional players. Qatar in the Middle East, maybe Singapore in Asia, perhaps a country like Kenya in parts of Africa. Norway is also positioning itself as a strategic mediator for the twenty-twenty-six era, focusing on conflicts that affect global food and energy markets.
It is like the market for diplomacy is diversifying. You have your legacy brand, Switzerland, and then you have these new, agile startups that are willing to take more risks.
That is exactly it. But Switzerland is not just sitting still. They are trying to modernize. They are getting more involved in digital diplomacy and mediating conflicts over things like water rights and climate change. They are trying to show that neutrality is not just about staying out of wars, but about being a facilitator for the new types of global problems we are facing.
It is interesting to think about how this affects the average Swiss person. Do they take pride in this? Or is it just something that happens in those big buildings in Geneva that they do not really think about?
Most Swiss people are incredibly proud of their neutrality. It is a core part of their national myth. They see it as their contribution to world peace. Even if it is also a very clever business strategy, the people on the ground genuinely believe in the mission. It is part of their civic duty.
That is a powerful combination. When your national interest and your national identity are perfectly aligned. It makes for a very resilient system.
It really does. But let us talk about the risks for a second. We mentioned Russia calling them an unfriendly state. What happens if China does the same? Or if the United States decides that Switzerland is being too helpful to their enemies?
That is the tightrope walk. If you are too neutral, you are seen as a collaborator by both sides. If you are not neutral enough, you lose your job. It is a constant calibration.
And the Swiss are masters of that calibration. They have this phrase, active neutrality. It basically means we are neutral, but we are going to be very busy being neutral. We are going to talk to everyone, even the people you hate, specifically so we can help you when you need us.
It is a bit of a flex, honestly. It is like saying, we are so stable and so useful that you have to put up with us talking to your worst enemies.
It really is. And I think that answers Daniel's question about the quid pro quo. The return is freedom. By being the middleman for everyone, Switzerland bought its own independence and its own security in a way that very few other small countries have ever managed.
It is a fascinating model. But it feels so unique to their specific history and geography. I do not know if you could replicate it anywhere else. You cannot just decide to be Switzerland. You need two hundred years of people not invading you and a mountain range to help.
And a lot of very patient lawyers.
Exactly. I think we have really peeled back the layers on this one. It is not just about being a nice neighbor; it is a sophisticated, centuries-old strategy for national survival and influence.
It really is. And it is something we see playing out in real-time every single day. Every time you hear about a prisoner swap or a secret message between hostile nations, there is a very good chance a Swiss diplomat was involved in making it happen.
Well, I hope that gives Daniel some food for thought. It definitely changed how I think about those quiet embassies in Bern. Before we head out, I want to make sure we give our listeners some practical takeaways. Because this stuff can feel very abstract, but it actually has real-world implications for how we understand the news.
Absolutely. One of the big takeaways for me is the value of institutional trust. Switzerland did not become the world's middleman overnight. They spent decades, centuries even, building a reputation for being reliable and discreet. In a world where everything feels very fast and transactional, there is a massive competitive advantage in being the person or the entity that people can trust for the long haul.
That is so true. Another takeaway for me is the idea of active neutrality. Often, we think of being neutral as doing nothing. But as we saw with Switzerland, real neutrality is a very active, difficult process. It requires more engagement, not less. You have to understand all sides, maintain relationships with everyone, and be constantly working to keep those lines of communication open.
Right. It is not about being a blank slate; it is about being a fair platform. And I think the third takeaway is the importance of having a niche. Switzerland realized they could not compete with the big powers in terms of military might, so they found a specific function that the big powers actually needed. They made themselves indispensable by solving a problem that no one else wanted to handle.
That is a great lesson for any small player in a big system. Find the thing that the big guys are too busy or too biased to do, and do it better than anyone else. Finally, I think we should all keep an eye on how these roles are shifting. The world is becoming more multipolar, and that means we are going to see more countries trying to play this middleman role. It is going to make international relations a lot more complex, but also potentially more resilient, because we will have more bridges instead of just one.
Well said, Herman. This has been a deep dive I did not know I needed today. Thanks to Daniel for sending this in. It is always fun to dig into these hidden gears of the world.
You can find the contact form on our website at myweirdprompts.com. You can also find our full archive of over five hundred episodes there. If you enjoyed this one, check out episode three hundred thirty-eight on honorary consuls or episode four hundred seventeen on back-channel diplomacy.
And if you are enjoying the show, we would really appreciate a quick review on your podcast app or a rating on Spotify. It genuinely helps other people find us and keeps the show growing. We are a small team, and your support means a lot.
It really does. Alright, that is all for today. I'm Corn.
And I'm Herman Poppleberry.
Thanks for listening to My Weird Prompts. We will see you in the next one.
Until next time!
So, Herman, seriously, if you were a Swiss diplomat, what would be your code name?
Oh, definitely something boring. Like, The File Clerk. Or The Notary.
I was thinking more like The Chocolate Fondue.
That is why you are not a diplomat, Corn. You would leak the secret code in the first five minutes just for a pun.
Guilty as charged. See you everyone!
Bye!
One last thing before we go, I was just thinking about that point you made about the Swiss government being a collegiate system. It is so different from the cult of personality we see in so many other countries. It almost makes the government itself invisible, which I guess is the point.
Exactly. It is designed to be a machine, not a stage. The members of the Federal Council often take the train to work like everyone else. There is a story about a tourist asking a man for directions in Bern, only to find out later it was the President of the Swiss Confederation.
That is incredible. Imagine that happening in Washington or London. It really reinforces that idea of the country as a service provider rather than a power player. It is a completely different philosophy of what a state should be.
It really is. And in a world that feels increasingly loud and chaotic, there is something almost comforting about the idea of a country that just wants to be a really good, really quiet administrator.
Maybe we should all be a little more Swiss in our daily lives. Less shouting, more filing.
I will start with my book collection. It is overdue for some serious categorization. One final check on the numbers, because I know people love the specifics. You mentioned eight protecting power mandates currently. That is down from their peak, right?
Yeah, during World War Two they had over two hundred. But even eight is a lot in a modern context. It is important to remember that these are not just paper agreements. They are active, daily responsibilities. Every time an Iranian official wants to send a formal diplomatic note to the United States, it goes through a Swiss diplomat's hands. It is a massive amount of communication to manage.
And they do it all with that classic Swiss precision. It is amazing that the system hasn't broken down given how tense some of these relationships are.
It is a testament to the framework. When everyone agrees on the rules of the game, even enemies can find a way to coexist, as long as there is someone there to hold the whistle.
Well, I'm glad someone is doing it. I certainly wouldn't want that job. Can you imagine the stress of being the one person who has to make sure a message doesn't get mistranslated between two nuclear-armed states?
It is not for the faint of heart, that is for sure. But the Swiss seem to have the perfect temperament for it.
They really do. Alright, we are actually leaving now. Thanks again for sticking with us through the tangents!
Bye everyone!
Seriously, Herman, you need to organize those books. It's getting out of hand.
I'm working on it, Corn! I'm working on it!
This has been My Weird Prompts. Find us at myweirdprompts.com. See ya!
