- Introduction
While walking through the old town of Geneva, Switzerland on my first day in this unfamiliar city, I came across a building with an unexpectedly familiar label: Alabama. As an American, I immediately questioned why a room in the Geneva City Hall was named after one of our 50 states. After reading the plaque posted on the wall, I realized that the Alabama Room was the site of two of the most influential events in the history of international law.
The room was named after The Alabama Arbitration, an international dispute over England’s role in prolonging the American Civil War by supplying the Confederacy with warships. The agreement signed in this room in 1872 resulted in Britain paying the United States millions in damages, representing one of the world’s first cases of international arbitration.
The reason this site was chosen for the negotiations was because of an event that took place in the same room just 8 years earlier. Delegates from 12 nations gathered in this room in 1864 to sign the first Geneva Convention, protecting wounded soldiers and medical personnel on the battlefield. The agreement not only represented the first treaty of international humanitarian law, but also inspired a legacy of global cooperation around expanding universal human rights through international law.
These watershed events, and many that followed, helped establish Geneva as the global “Capital of Peace”. However, today Geneva’s reputation hangs in the balance. The declining effectiveness of bilateral and multilateral diplomacy, disputes over Swiss neutrality, and a changing world order threaten Geneva’s ability to broker peace amidst increasingly violent conflict in the world.
Despite these challenges, Geneva remains a relevant and vitally necessary hub for diplomacy. As a student, I have seen firsthand the commitment of Geneva’s international community to preserve the city’s reputation of peacekeeping.
- Geneva as the “Peace Capital”
The city of Geneva has both a historical and a symbolic significance in the world of diplomacy. In 1863, a committee was formed in Geneva with the goal of caring for those wounded in battle, which would go on to become the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC). The following year the ICRC helped coordinate the first Geneva Convention, and over the next 50 years the Red Cross expanded its global reach by establishing National Societies to implement its mission around the world.
At the end of the First World War, the Treaty of Versailles established the League of Nations with the goal of preventing another world war through diplomacy and collective security. Given its central location and already impressive reputation for peace and neutrality, Geneva was chosen to host the headquarters of this intergovernmental organization in 1920. However, the League of Nations eventually failed to prevent the outbreak of World War II.
The end of the Second World War saw the birth of the United Nations (UN) in 1945. The UN, built on the League of Nations model, today unites 193 member states around three central aims: peace and security, human rights, and development. While its main headquarters is in New York City, the UN maintains its operational headquarters in Geneva.
Today Geneva is home to 40 international organizations, including the UN and other affiliated agencies like the World Trade Organization (WTO) and World Health Organization (WHO). The city also hosts more than 400 non-governmental organizations (NGOs), such as Doctors Without Borders and CARE International. Finally, more than 180 states are represented by a Permanent Mission in Geneva.
Beyond Geneva’s history of hosting institutions and agreements fostering peace, the city has long upheld the traditional Swiss principle of neutrality. In 1815, the Congress of Vienna brought international recognition to Switzerland’s policies of abstaining from participation in armed conflict, foreign military aid, and military alliances. While it has since taken steps that call into question its continued commitment to neutrality, Switzerland still boasts an unparalleled reputation of impartiality.
- Geneva as a Reflection of the World’s Crises
Given its presence on the international diplomatic stage, Geneva is a city that revolves around the world’s most pressing conflicts and tensions. The meetings that take place and the decisions that are made in Geneva have direct implications for the lives of people all over the world. Recently, Geneva has been at the center of some of the most urgent dialogues between states on issues like trade, human rights, and national security.
Amidst global uncertainty over US President Donald Trump’s tariff proposals, American and Chinese delegations met in Geneva in May to negotiate a compromise. These preliminary negotiations have since resulted in a substantial reduction of initial American and Chinese reciprocal import tariffs.
Geneva is also at the center of the ongoing crises in the Palestinian Territories. At the 59th session of the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva last month, the latest findings of the Independent International Commission of Inquiry on the Occupied Palestinian Territory were presented to the world. Their latest report spotlights the destruction of schools and religious and cultural sites in Gaza and other restrictive Israeli actions in the West Bank.
Most recently, Geneva hosted discussions in June between several European nations and Iran concerning the latter’s involvement in the conflict with Israel and the future of the Iranian nuclear program. Clearly, Geneva remains relevant to both multilateral diplomacy and international human rights protection.
- Geneva as a Relic of the Past
Despite the demonstrated relevance of Geneva in international affairs, many argue that the city’s success in providing an effective platform for multilateral diplomacy has significantly diminished over the last two decades. Executive Director of the Geneva Centre for Humanitarian Dialogue David Harland is at the forefront of this school of thought. Harland argues that diplomatic solutions to global security crises have declined since 2010, marked especially by the gridlock of the UN Security Council and the dismantling of existing international agreements. He places much of the blame on the West for adopting a foreign policy of “not speaking to those you don’t like” and insisting that others conform to certain democratic norms as a prerequisite for engaging in diplomacy.
The United States plays a part in Geneva’s fading legitimacy as a global peacemaker. Over the past decade, the United States has withdrawn itself from several key intergovernmental bodies. Under both terms of President Donald Trump, the US withdrew from the World Health Organization, the UN Human Rights Council, and the Paris Climate Accord. Additionally, the US withdrew from the UN Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization in 2017 and has disabled the WTO’s dispute settlement system by declining to appoint a member to the Appellate Body since 2019.
In recent years, the Swiss government has also taken several actions that have impacted its reputation as a neutral arbiter. In February of 2024, Switzerland decided to implement EU sanctions on Russia for its invasion of Ukraine. As a result, Russia now claims that Geneva no longer represents a neutral negotiating site. Additionally, the Swiss government temporarily withheld funding to the UN agency for Palestinian Refugees and banned Hamas from negotiating in Switzerland. These actions demonstrate Switzerland’s recent attempts to balance its own security needs and its desire to avoid creating a safe haven for terrorist organizations with its historic role of political impartiality. However, such decisions may also create barriers to Geneva’s ability to foster diplomatic solutions for two of today’s most dire conflicts.
- Geneva as an Intellectual Melting Pot
Reflecting on my time as a student in Geneva, it is impossible to ignore the immense diversity of backgrounds, experiences, and worldviews presented to me on a daily basis. The population of Geneva is incredibly diverse, with around 41% of people coming from a non-Swiss origin or nationality. The academic environment I experienced was similarly diverse, with around 39% of students (representing 161 countries) and 47% of professors (representing 33 countries) at the University of Geneva coming from a non-Swiss origin or nationality as of 2022. Clearly, students and educators from all over the world remain attracted to the opportunities for cross-cultural dialogue offered in Geneva.
My curriculum abroad gave me the opportunity to have discussions with my peers on the most pressing issues impacting our respective countries. I was constantly confronted with perspectives that challenged my understanding of the world and some of my most deeply rooted opinions of my own country of origin. I often approached these conversations in the classroom as if I myself were a diplomat representing my country.
I also had the opportunity to learn from professors at the top of their respective fields in an international environment. For the first time, I was exposed to an academic perspective of the United States as a “them” rather than a “we”. This perspective instilled in me an understanding that what Americans reduce to politics, is often seen by the rest of the world as policy. In my classroom discussions, there was rarely a mention of “democratic” or “republican” foreign policies, but rather “American” foreign policies. This is not to say that the international community is naive to the political divisions present in the United States. Instead, it is a testament to the fact that the actions taken by the United States (regardless of the people in power) have lasting impacts on foreign perceptions of American ideals.
It is no secret that the United States has recently taken steps towards isolationism and has distanced itself from some traditional allies. This trend is nowhere more evident than in the relationship between the US and Europe, which is now as fragile as ever. Tensions between the US and European allies over issues like trade and the conflict in Ukraine have created unprecedented rifts in relationships that trace back even before the formation of NATO in 1949.
Despite tensions between governments, the conversations I had with my European peers were grounded in respectful curiosity rather than hostility. Europeans know what the US government thinks, but they are curious about what Americans think. They regularly ask how aligned the American public is with the actions of its government. What strikes me the most is the patience of Europeans to continue to engage in dialogue with Americans. While some are more outspoken and critical of the United States than others, there is almost always a level of decency and respect that many Americans do not seem to reciprocate. Ultimately, my experience has illustrated that the relationship between the United States and Europe is resilient and there is hope for a future of mutual cooperation.
- Geneva as an Imperfect Utopia
While the multicultural learning environment I was exposed to has challenged my perspectives in many ways, it has also shown me that there is a consensus among Geneva’s international students and educators. The academic community is largely united in its belief that Geneva has a crucial role to play in ensuring international security going forward. There is hope among academics that the next generation of leaders will work to restore trust in international peacemaking institutions. It takes diversity to recognize the importance of cooperation, and Geneva’s diversity is both what created its reputation for peace and what will save it.
Geneva still represents a utopian vision of a peaceful future. However, peace is not meant to be perfect, either in process or in outcome. Peace requires making concessions, recognizing faults, and putting aside disagreement or even hatred. These behaviors are extremely challenging for people, and they are even more challenging for nations of people. It is much easier to avoid confrontation than to pursue peace. Unfortunately, leaders continue to settle for what’s easy. The greatest threat to peace is people refusing to engage with those they disagree with. Ultimately, my experience in Geneva has shown me that peace is developed just as much in the classroom, dorm room, and dining room as it is in the Alabama Room.
Image source: openverse
