Since World War 2 the Nations of Switzerland and the United Kingdom have undergone many changes when it comes to security (foreign policy) and reforms of political institutions like civil rights and liberties in their Constitutions. Like many nations how they went about this and to what conclusions they came to on policy have many similarities and differences. It is these comparisons on a governmental action on a policy that will ultimately determine the fate of these nations and their roles in this highly interconnected world. With this, neither State can be objectively determined better or better off than the other in whole. Rather, it can be determined in these two categories that the active role that the United Kingdom plays in foreign affairs helps create a security needed for the nation when it comes to economic, world political power and respect, and national security is superior to that of Switzerland. .
While the foundation of a specific Constitution by the Swiss, according to the opinion of this writer, can be considered to be a stronger way of protecting what a nation wants and will want for its citizens and guidelines its governmental actions. This paper will be going over the reasons while the security (foreign policy) of the United Kingdom is superior to that of the Switzerland's basic form of isolationism while at the same time showing how Switzerland's political institutions keep the nation from going in directions the founders were not intending while protecting its citizens with clear and undisputed rights unlike the United Kingdom. This does not go for saying that there are valued arguments for either side of the arguments. .
The Security of the United Kingdom relies heavily upon it foreign affairs policies, that of which can be considered leaving the State better off than that of Switzerland. The United Kingdom's policy of being involved in world affairs greatly benefit the nation when it comes to that of economic stability, world political power and respect, and national security.