ABSTRACT
Though deriving its ra£son d 'etre from the state of war and having its ultimate political, as well as only legal, significance in warlike situations, the successful implementation of neutrality requires meticulous preparatory work in peacetime. In this respect, twentieth-century neutrality, and particularly in the post-World War II era, has encountered a major obstacle in the form of the growing attempts, at both regional and global levels, to organise the international community. Gaining considerable momentum in the aftermath of World War II, this development posed two primary problems to the state seeking to ground its neutrality on the positive component. First, it had to find a way to bridge the gap between the desire to take part in international life - with its concomitant demand to participate actively in international organisations, some based on the idea of collective security - and the demands for nonalignment, aloofness and at times even isolation, that derive from the very selection of a neutral policy. Secondly, the small state faced the question to what extent could a neutral maintain maximum parity (so vital to the building of credibility) in its relationships with the various blocs and camps, given the complex network ofeconomic interdependence and reciprocity, developed within the international system. The ways and means through which the small European neutrals have tackled these issues and have gradually overcome this ostensibly unbridgeable gap between international co-operation and neutrality is the subject of this chapter.
