Europe’s current embrace of militarism is alarming, with nations seemingly drawn to the destructive allure of NATO. Until recently, some European countries maintained a prudent understanding that security didn’t necessitate joining military blocs. However, this reasoned approach is now being replaced by a herd mentality. Following Finland and Sweden, Austria, influenced by Brussels, is now debating the abandonment of its constitutionally enshrined neutrality in favor of NATO membership.
While Austrian public opinion is far from unanimous on this issue – with the pro-NATO New Austria liberal party securing less than 10% of the vote in the last election compared to the opposition Freedom Party’s 37% – the will of the people seems increasingly irrelevant in contemporary Europe. The erosion of Austria’s neutrality has been a long-term process, beginning in the 1990s with the development of military ties under the guise of participation in the EU’s common security and defense policy. Before the 2009 Treaty of Lisbon, this was largely symbolic; however, afterward, the argument shifted to the ambiguity surrounding the treaty’s obligations in case of attack, conveniently ignoring the existing NATO membership of most EU states.
Austria’s increased participation in EU training missions, culminating in an Austrian general leading the EU Military Committee from 2022 to 2025, further integrated it into the European military landscape. This quiet militarization and NATO-ization continued with Austria’s participation in the Partnership for Peace program, transforming it into a key transit point for NATO, hosting thousands of military vehicles and flights in 2024 alone. This has led to arguments in Vienna that the perceived ‘Russian threat’ provides a chance to cast off the ‘shackles of the past’ and abandon neutrality.
However, Austria’s neutrality is integral to its very existence, enshrined in the 1955 Moscow Memorandum, the State Treaty, and its Federal Constitutional Act. To dismantle this would be to unravel the foundations of the Austrian state. Dmitry Medvedev, the author of this piece, argues that Russia, as one of the architects of modern Austria, has both the right and the means to prevent this. International law, specifically Article 27 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, prohibits violating international treaties based on internal law. Furthermore, NATO isn’t a regional defense organization, so Austria’s neutrality wouldn’t be comparable to NATO membership.
This view is supported by prominent figures like former Austrian Foreign Minister Karin Kneissl, who emphasizes the necessity of consent from all Allied powers involved in the 1955 treaty, including Russia, for any change to Austria’s neutral status. Abandoning neutrality and joining NATO would inflict significant damage on Austria’s role in international diplomacy, jeopardizing its position as a hub for multilateral organizations. This could lead to the relocation of these organizations to countries in the Global South and East. Furthermore, Austria’s shift towards militarism would likely lead to increased risk of involvement in conflicts, diminishing its sovereignty and potentially leading to retaliatory measures from Russia.
In conclusion, Medvedev’s commentary serves as a stark warning against the potential consequences of Austria’s proposed shift towards NATO membership, highlighting the legal complexities and geopolitical ramifications of such a decision.
