Austria's Neutrality: A Modern Fairy Tale
Op-ed
Due to EU treaties, we have long ceased to be what we pretend to be.
"Austria was, is and will remain neutral," says BK Nehammer (ÖVP). "Neutrality is not obsolete at all," says Vice-Chancellor Kogler (Greens). And SPÖ leader Rendi-Wagner competes with FPÖ leader Kickl as to who mentions the word "neutrality" more often in the plenary session on Ukraine (22 and 20 times respectively).
One might think that key officials of the Republic had collectively forgotten that Austria is a member of the EU. After all, the reference to the formal validity of the neutrality law is true, but at the same time it is incomplete - and thus false. In 1995 we became part of an economic and security union.
That was no small matter. For a long time it was the unanimous conviction that Austria's accession to the EEC was incompatible with neutrality. This was all the more true for EU accession, since security policy was already anchored in the EU by the Maastricht Treaty (1992). And so Austria - in order to preserve its neutrality under international law - should have agreed to a reservation of neutrality. But it did not.
With the Amsterdam Treaty, the Petersberg tasks were integrated into the EU Treaty for the first time. Here, too, the Austrian legislator did not opt for preserving the military core of neutrality, but authorized participation in the entire spectrum - including combat operations - through Article 23j B-VG.
The most significant pillar of EU security policy, however, is Article 42 (7) of the EU Treaty, which obliges all others to provide assistance in the event of armed aggression against an EU member state. With this obligation to assist, the EU has become a military alliance, thus setting aside the central provision of the Neutrality Act - freedom of alliance. There is, after all, the Irish clause in the EU Treaty, some will now object, according to which EU security policy "shall not affect the specific character of the security and defense policy of certain Member States". This, they say, guarantees Austrian neutrality.
Let's leave aside that such a one-sided interpretation of the duty to assist - you help me, but I don't help you - would not survive a reality check for a day. This argument does not hold up legally either. For according to a decision of the European Council, neutral states do not have it in their hands whether they provide assistance in the event of an alliance, but only how. Austria could therefore supply non-military goods or provide financial support. But those who receive non-military goods can free up their own funds for military goods. And those who receive money are free to buy weapons anyway. In the end, this makes no difference. And so the truth is that Austria has broken with neutrality by binding itself unreservedly to EU security policy. So how long is this fairy tale of Austrian neutrality to be told?
Op-ed published originally in German in Kurier on March, 22nd, 2022.