【Report】Neutral Actors in the New Multipolar World

Dr. Pascal Lottaz

On June 4, Dr. Pascal Lottaz delivered a presentation titled “Neutral Actors in the New Multipolar World” at Ritsumeikan University. He examined the concept of neutrality in International Relations, its historical evolution, and its continued relevance in today’s multipolar order.

Dr. Lottaz opened the session by situating neutrality within the broader landscape of IR theory. He highlighted that most IR theories have been developed from a Western-centric perspective and, thus, tend to overlook neutrality in favour of concepts such as hedging and bandwagoning. Dr. Lottaz’s central argument is that neutrality does not disappear but changes its shape in response to the international environment and the nature of conflicts. He emphasized that neutrality is not exclusively a strategy for small or weak states, using the 1941 Soviet-Japanese Neutrality Pact as an example.

Dr. Lottaz pointed to historical examples from the Napoleonic Wars (Swiss neutrality) to World War I (Danish and Norwegian neutrality), World War II (Irish, Spanish, Portuguese, and Turkish neutrality), and the Cold War (Austrian, Finnish, and Yugoslav neutrality/nonalignment) to show that each major conflict has given rise to its own neutral actors and new forms of neutrality. Dr. Lottaz introduced a typology for understanding neutral countries. Under the category of official policy, he distinguished between states that have neutrality in their constitutions or formal foreign policy documents, such as Switzerland and Sweden, and those that adopt a foreign policy of non-alignment. He stated that the term “non-alignment” is commonly used in Southeast Asia and Africa, where the colonial connotations of the term neutrality have historically made it less appealing. As an analytical category, he highlighted neutralist strategies and neutrality discourse. He also noted the existence of neutral non-state actors, citing the International Committee of the Red Cross as a key example.

Regarding the theoretical framework, Dr. Lottaz clarified the position of neutral actors within conflict. He stated that neutral actors are not part of the conflict but are always part of the conflict constellation, maintaining peaceful bilateral relations with all parties. The presentation then turned to the case studies of Oman and India as neutral actors. He discussed the neutral strategies of Oman and India by providing examples from their official documents, statements, and news reports.

The presentation concluded with a Q&A session. The audience asked many interesting questions, including the conditions under which states can maintain neutrality in today’s multipolar order, the distinction between neutrality and related IR concepts such as buck-passing and hedging, and how non-Western countries are shaping the discourse on neutrality outside of Western IR frameworks. Merve OZTURK ASIL.