Yeah, they were officially neutral (with enemies you know where you stand, but with neutrals? Who knows! It sickens me), but I bet most Swiss people had an opinion on the outcome of the largest conflict in history. Were any studies ever conducted on the point? What are the opinions of the older Swiss today?
On one hand, they better have wanted us to win because of freedom and whatnot, plus I doubt they really thought their neutral status would protect them - didn’t work for Belgium, Holland, Luxembourg or Norway - I suspect having one of the most armed populations in the world was more to due with keeping the Wehrmacht away. On the other hand they have more in common culturally with Germany/Italy/Austria than Britain/America/the Soviets and did make a fortune on Nazi gold.
Probably even slightly more complex than the picture you paint.
The Swiss probably would have been more comfortable without Nazi Germany camped on their borders. Hitler had a habit of swallowing countries, even if they didn’t have a Germanic population.
In that sense they probably preferred the Allies but… they probably wouldn’t have been too happy if the Soviets had camped on their borders either (say if they had managed to get to Austria before the Americans or British).
I’m pretty sure they wanted an Allied victory. Switzerland well knew Hitler’s ultimate goal was the inclusion of all German-speaking areas in one Reich and that clearly meant Switzerland would not long survive a German victory. If they could have listened in on his Table Talk they would have been even more worried. He made it quite clear in his conversations that Switzerland would be ‘dealt with’ once the war was over, with the German parts going to Germany, the Italian to Italy and the French and Romansh areas becoming a rump state or melding with France.
There was a tiny party of Swiss Germans that were admirers of Hitler in the early days and would’ve been quite happy to join the greater Germany. But don’t forget that 20-25% of Swiss are French speaking and those feel closer to France. So there was a lot of sympathy with the Allies too. Also lots of UK people used to come on vacation to Switzerland (especially before / after World War I) so the Swiss have a soft spot for the British.
All in all, their first goal was to make sure that no one took over. The Swiss want nothing more than to be left alone. And I’m sure they realized that they had a much better chance of that if the Allies won.
Hitler despised Switzerland, and would eventually have conquered it had he dominated Europe. It’s how the Nazis rolled. War wasn’t their method, it was their objective.
The Wikipedia page on Operation Tannenbaum may be of interest here.
Short version: Hitler though Switzerland was “a pimple on the face of Europe” and Hitler asked the army to prepare an invasion plan of Switzerland. He would’ve gotten around to it eventually (giving Italy the Italian-speaking part of Switzerland) if those pesky Russians hadn’t interfered with his well-laid plans for a new, improved German Reich.
Switzerland expected to be invaded by the Nazis. Their war plan was to retreat across the Rhine, and then blow up every single bridge and tunnel. This would have meant ceding most of the country’s productive farmland, factories, and major cities, but would also have turned it into an impregnable fortress. Germany’s main rail link with Italy would have been cut off, effective stranding German forces in Italy since the British Navy made resupply by water too risky.
So given that the Swiss were willing to completely screw up their own country rather than be swallowed up by Germany, I’d say they were more on the side of the Allies than of the Axis.
I don’t know about the general population, but during the phony war, the Swiss government and military had devised a contingency plan with France in case Switzerland would be invaded by Germany. It doesn’t prove that they preferred an allied victory, but at least that they had more confidence in them than in the Germans.
I remember there was a Nazi party in Switzerland, too. Someone knowing more about it and about the authorities reaction will probably be able to shed light on the government and population views.
About neutrals, I would say that Belgium neutral stance cost dearly to the allies at the beginning of WWII. It both prevented the allies from prepositioning in Belgium (instead most of the armies were piled up at the border waiting to rush in when Germany would attack, and the general chaos caused by rushing in and then out during the offensive was a major component of the catastrophic defeat) but also from fortifying the border (because Belgium was worried that then the allies would stay behind the fortifications instead of fighting for Belgium). So they wanted their cake and wanted to eat it, managed to get both, and this turned out to be catastrophic for everybody, including themselves.
don’t forget that the swiss served as hide-out for the gold the nazis took away from the jews… there were deals to guarantee a free switzerland as long as they guaranteed the bank secrecy about the origin and transfers of those fortunes. If a country is so useful to ALL leaders it can stay neutral…
National Front. There were French and Italian versions, but not as important. They had some clout in Hitler’s early years, but lost power by the time of the war. Eidgenössische Sammlung was a group that followed until 1943. Some other fascist groups, but I think this was the biggest.
Wilhelm Gustloff was the head of the Nazi Party. He was assassinated in 1936, and I don’t think the party did as well after that.
Some parts of this may be true, but the whole does not follow, so cite?
This simply isn’t true. Hitler made no such deal with the Swiss, secret or otherwise. Why would he need a hide-out for Nazi gold? You’re imagining a post-war situation when, of course, the Nazis were in no position to deal with anybody.
So, according to wikipedia, the party lost massively a referendum and later was dissolved by the government. It says something about Switzerland and Swiss citizens stance.
Although it’s true that the Swiss are known for fighting fiercely for their independence, I doubt the percentage of “armed” civilians had much to do with Germany leaving Switzerland alone. Hitler was fine attacking the largest army in the world (the Red Army), which was armed to the teeth, with more guns, artillery, rockets, tanks, and aircraft than the Germans had.
I attribute it mostly to the fantastically difficult terrain, which has been the main factor in permitting the Swiss to remain independent for centuries while surrounded by much larger, expansionist neighbors.
One of the things, if not THE thing, that led to Hitler’s rise in power was the horrible shape of the German economy. Devastated by WWI treaty concessions and the world-wide Depression.
What was the Swiss economy like in the 1930s? I would suspect that would have shaped many Swiss’s opinion of the political landscape, no?
Hitler was however a bit of a prat when it came to attacking Russia, claiming that “We have only to kick in the door and the whole rotten structure will come crashing down.”
Germans had a historical hatred of guerillas stemming back from their experiences of Francs-tireurs in the Franco-Prussian War - their reprisals for partisan activities being particularly brutal even by Nazi standards. By invading Switzerland, a country with a well regulated militia (where have I heard that before…?) where most men know their way around a rifle they’re essentially invading a nation of Francs-tireurs.
Although you are correct of course that the mountainous geography of Switzerland is well-suited for its defenders.
Good to hear that consensus so far is that they backed the winners.
Hitler’s apathy to invading Switzerland had nothing to do with a half-trained militia. As noted above the Swiss plan was to completely retreat into the mountains; even they knew that a half-trained militia was no match for a professional army.