Malta’s Neutrality: Is It Enough in a Changing World?

For much of its modern history, Malta has relied on one word to keep itself safe: neutrality. It is written into the Constitution, debated in politics, and often treated as a guarantee that the island can avoid being dragged into war. But can Malta truly depend on neutrality alone in today’s world? Or should the country be thinking more seriously about how to prepare for the threats of the future?

Geography Has Never Been Neutral

Malta sits at the very heart of the Mediterranean. That location has always been both a blessing and a curse. For centuries, it made the island a coveted prize. The Phoenicians, Romans, Arabs, Knights of St John, French, and British all fought to possess Malta.

It is tempting to believe that 80 years of peace since the end of the Second World War have changed this centuries-old reality. Yet geography does not change. Malta still lies on a crucial chokepoint of maritime traffic, linking three continents, and its neighbourhood is becoming increasingly unstable.

The Palace Square Valletta on the occasion of the three days visit of the the Duke of York on 25 Mar 1901

Malta's Neutrality in a Neighbourhood of Hotzones

Malta may not share a border with any war zone, but it is uncomfortably close to several. Instability in Libya has persisted for more than a decade, while tensions in the Eastern Mediterranean regularly flare over energy, borders, and geopolitics. In such a neighbourhood, even countries that prefer to sit quietly on the sidelines cannot ignore the shifting currents.

Strategic Location in the Modern Era

Some argue that modern long-range weapons and global surveillance have made Malta less important than it once was. But location still matters, just for different reasons. In an era of global competition, Malta’s position makes it a valuable node for maritime surveillance and rapid logistical support. It sits at the intersection of trade and defence routes, a point where three continents meet. This makes the island a potential staging ground for intelligence gathering, communications interception, and covert operations.

Mediterranean Trade Routes

Even without a single shot being fired from Maltese soil, the island could be used to disrupt shipping lanes or interfere with critical undersea cable routes. An occupier could harm others or protect its own interests indirectly. History has shown how quickly Malta’s role can change. In the Second World War, Field Marshal Rommel himself warned that losing Malta would cost the Axis control of North Africa. He was right.

Neutrality and the Limits of Protection

Neutrality has been Malta’s shield since the Cold War. But neutrality is only respected when others choose to respect it. Modern threats are harder to predict, faster to materialise, and less visible than in the past. Cyber attacks, intelligence operations, or interference with maritime traffic cannot be stopped by neutrality alone. The reality is that Malta’s future security cannot rely only on diplomatic words. It must also depend on deterrence.

Building a Credible Defence

A credible defence does not mean vast armies or tank battalions. For a small island like Malta, the goal is not to win wars but to make any potential invasion or hostile use of its territory too costly to be worthwhile.

That requires the right tools: patrol vessels to monitor the seas, drones and radar to extend Malta’s eyes and ears, cyber defence to protect communications, and well-trained personnel able to respond rapidly to crises. In short, Malta needs the capacity to see, to respond, and to survive.

The Spending Gap

Here lies the problem. Malta currently spends about 0.56 percent of its GDP on defence. On paper, that figure looks comparable to other neutral nations such as Ireland (0.24 percent) and Switzerland (0.7 percent). But the comparison is misleading.

Ireland and Switzerland may spend a small share of their GDP, but their overall budgets are large. Ireland still spends over €1.2 billion on defence. Switzerland spends close to €6 billion. Both fund credible capabilities. Malta, in contrast, spends only around €100 million, leaving little real deterrence in practice.

The Price of Readiness

Building even a basic defensive system would require greater investment. Estimates show that military drones cost between €10 and €30 million, patrol vessels between €60 and €120 million, radar systems between €20 and €40 million, and cyber defence capabilities between €5 and €10 million.

These numbers may look daunting for a small country, but they highlight the scale of the challenge. If Malta wants to make itself resilient, it will need to think carefully about where to prioritise spending.

A Choice for the Future

Neutrality has served Malta well. It kept the island out of Cold War entanglements and gave it credibility as a peaceful mediator in the Mediterranean. But the Cold War world is gone. The threats of today are faster, more diffuse, and harder to predict. Our island’s future may depend not only on remaining neutral, but also on being ready.