Let's say a Romanian soldier committed a war crime in 1916 (perhaps he was found beating German POWs) and fled to Zurich. Would he have been safe there or could someone (Swiss, German, Romanian, etc.) have come looking for him and arrested him there? I know Switzerland was officially neutral, but could it have really functioned as a safe house for people fleeing the war for one reason or another? Thank you to anyone who cares to venture an answer.
2006-10-25 09:09:26 · 3 answers · asked by xander_earl 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Military
It's neutral, period. Off limits to all waring parties forces. Being a crime, they would have to go throught a extradition process. If there is no treaty, then the Swiss are not under any obligation to return the guy. IN practice anybody who entered Swiss territory was held till the end of the war. That goes for equipment as well. Portugal built a whole airforce on captured Axis & allied planes in ww2..
2006-10-25 09:23:55 · answer #1 · answered by lana_sands 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If any soldier enters a neutral state during war in an official uniformed capacity they are interned (imprisoned- but with no intent to punish) until the war is finished. They are then repatriated automatically when hostilities cease.
If a soldier enters a neutral state anonymously then they are a guest of that country. However they are subject to any extradition treaty which may be functional. Switzerland maintained its treaties during World War I in theory- however in practise the chaos and threats of the situation made this difficult. In contrast Sweden maintained a safe house policy throughout the war and suspended extraditions.
2006-10-25 16:33:03 · answer #2 · answered by Peter F 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No, once you were in a neutral country you were safe.
I saw a photo once of a swiss airfield in WW2 which was full of B17 bombers where U.S.A.F crews who had had enough of the war diverted to Switzerland after their raids and stayed there.
2006-10-26 10:06:32 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋