neutral countrys the status by not to become involve in wars. perhaps the militaire will be alert but will not begin a war in another country. Norway, Schweiz and Austria are example of neutral countrys. Norway and Schweiz are member o f United Nations but not a member of EU. Austria there join EU in 1995.
i thiink today with globalisation make it more difficult to be netural. how is neutral country affect by war in Iraq and Afghanistan? do neutral countrys care about the standard other and more powverful countrys try to impose on them?
do you think also that to be neutral means the country will not care about world organisation like NATO want to attack a country like recent i n Libya?
Like
Merope, I appreciate the question. However, I would like to point out that Norway, although not an EU or €uro-member, is not a
neutral country, as Norway is a member of the
military alliance, NATO.
Hence, Norway's military (SOFs) participated in the initial invasion of Afghanistan and Norwegian air force fighters are currently there bombing Libya.
Finland and Sweden are examples of
militarily neutral countries who stay out of
military alliences and thus do not participate in armed conflicts as active belligrents, like NATO members Norway and Denmark do. Finland, Sweden, Norway and Denmark, however, are all members of the
non-military cooperation, the Nordic Council. Denmark, Finland and Sweden, again, are members of the EU, which is an economic alliance, not a
military one.
Finland and Sweden are in Afghanistan and Iraq as part of the effort to create a civil society and hopefully a democratic one. Both Sweden and Finland are also very active UN peacekeepers. Sweden is the poster country when it comes to accepting, say, Iraq war refugees. Whereas Finland is the poster country in peace-making. Both are very active members in the UN to boot.
So I would start by making a distinction between a
military alliance vs. a
neutral country; war vs. peace; military action vs. actively building civil societies around the world, economic/cultural/"value"-based alliances, and globalization itself, which is very much an economic (& communication) issue, not a military one.
Also, I would note that maintaining one's (military) neutrality means that one must have a credible military defense in place, like Finland, Sweden, and Switzerland all have. They invest a lot in the defense budgets and rely on conscription -- the only way these relatively small countries can ensure the manpower needed to protect & defend their borders. A (military) power vacum would be an open invitation to foreign invasion.
Consequently, Sweden especially ranks among one of the world's top arms exporter. Finland also has a military export industry to reckon with. Selling arms to fuel armed conflicts -- where is the
neutrality in that, you could ask, for example.
