Kateryna KrasinaAustria, a country with traditionally strong beliefs in the necessity of maintaining neutrality (it is not a NATO member) and with some sympathies toward Russia, at first glance may resemble today’s Hungary under Viktor Orbán or Slovakia under Robert Fico.
However, participating in several expert discussions in Vienna in October–November this year led me to somewhat different conclusions.
1. Expert Discourse: Hybrid Threats, Neutrality, and Austria’s Security Debate
Austria’s expert community is very active, involving civil society members, think tanks, and decision-makers. Currently, the main topics discussed in Vienna include the hybrid threats Europe faces; the relevance or irrelevance of maintaining state neutrality; support for Ukraine; and the impact of Russia’s policies on the European security environment. In addition, debates are ongoing about the role of Europe and Austria in international political and economic relations and in security alliances.
A key topic is hybrid threats from Russia – particularly cyberattacks, espionage, and drone overflights across European states. All of this is perceived as a credible threat among experts. However, they emphasize that the general population tends to downplay these risks, which affects governmental decision-making.
In the context of responding to the changing geopolitical landscape, the issue of whether neutrality should be maintained is actively discussed. Neutrality was imposed on Austria during the Cold War, yet an increasing number of Austrian politicians and experts believe it has lost its relevance. At the same time, unlike expert circles, many Austrians do not clearly understand the limitations that neutrality imposes, making public opinion easy to manipulate – something Russia effectively exploits through friendly politicians, media, so-called “useful idiots,” and ordinary citizens who believe neutrality guarantees safety.
As a result, Austrian experts admit that society today would not be ready to abandon neutrality. In a referendum, approximately 70% of the population would vote to keep it. Experts explain that for many Austrians, neutrality equals “a guarantee that they will never again be at war.” These sentiments influence government actions: officials act less decisively due to fear of losing public support. To overcome this, experts highlight the need to improve strategic communication with the population, particularly explaining what neutrality actually entails and how its limitations weaken Austria’s foreign policy, as well as informing citizens about current security realities in Europe.
Traditionally, government and public opinion hold that from the perspective of foreign and defense policy, neutrality provides Austria with a room for maneuver – the country may join military actions with the approval of the EU but is not obligated to do so. However, Austrian experts increasingly recognize that neutrality cannot protect Austria in the event of a conflict. On the contrary, cooperation with other states and ensuring collective security in the region is considered essential.
Airspace protection is the most relevant topic in this regard. The European Sky Shield initiative is identified as especially important for Austria, particularly after months of repeated drone overflights across various European states. Russia actively opposes this initiative – evidenced by regular protests calling to reject “militarization,” ignoring the fact that Sky Shield is purely a defensive system.
2. European Union Debates: Bureaucracy, Defense, and Strategic Autonomy
When it comes to EU issues, Austrian intellectuals focus on the effectiveness of EU mechanisms, paying special attention to defense, economics, and decision-making. Experts highlight a significant problem: EU bureaucratization, which slows down fast and coordinated decisions.
The voting system within the EU is a frequent subject of discussion – especially calls to abandon the veto system and move to qualified majority voting (notably in the context of aid to Ukraine, where Hungary and Slovakia routinely use their vetoes). For now, experts consider such changes unrealistic.
In the defense sector, experts recognize the fragmentation of the European arms market and cooperation mechanisms. Military procurement is overly oriented toward national producers, and project implementation times are long. This represents a major obstacle to European rearmament: goal-setting alone cannot quickly lead to timely and effective results. European countries also remain dependent on U.S. technologies, intelligence, and strategic enablers such as reconnaissance satellites. Given Donald Trump’s policies, this is viewed as a vulnerability for the EU – therefore, accelerating integration in procurement and coordination is considered essential.
The EU still faces implementation challenges and an issue of political will. Strategic debates are needed on Europe’s role and its commitments. These include developing technologies and research, strengthening the industrial base – especially the defense sector – and fostering resilience.
In the economic sector, experts also highlight the need for reindustrialization, greater production capacity, and improved functioning of the EU internal market.
One memorable line from the discussions – “a country that does not produce steel cannot shape geopolitics” – illustrates the importance of restoring Europe’s industrial base.
Overall, European and Austrian policies are viewed through the lens of geopolitics shaped by the US, China, and, of course, the Russia-Ukraine war. The actions of these powers influence Europe’s understanding of the need to boost production, strengthen resilience to tariffs and sanctions, and learn to defend Europe independently. Europe – and Austria as part of it – must speak with one voice and remain firm in defending its principles.
3. Austrian Views on Ukraine: Supportive but Limited by Neutrality
Regarding Ukraine, most experts support assistance to our country but acknowledge the limitations imposed by Austria’s neutrality. They note Austria’s financial support but remain hesitant about providing military-technical assistance.
There is a sense that Austrians understand that Europe cannot repeat its previous policy of appeasing Russia, and they hold no unrealistic expectations about Putin’s policies or his willingness to negotiate. Achieving an unstable ceasefire in the Russia–Ukraine war is not considered a good solution. The goal should be a just and lasting peace, in which Ukraine has a say.
At the same time, Austrians are not yet ready to change their approach to military aid for Ukraine – and this is something Ukraine must continue working on.