Austria’s Foreign Minister Beate Meinl-Reisinger has called for an open discussion on the country’s long-standing neutrality, stating that it no longer guarantees national security in the face of growing geopolitical instability and an increasingly aggressive Russia.
In an interview with Die Welt, Meinl-Reisinger emphasized that neutrality alone does not protect Austria and pointed to the importance of strengthening defense capabilities and deepening international partnerships. “Austria is protected by investment in its own defense capacities and in its partnerships,” she said.
The minister’s remarks follow a proposal by Emil Brix, Director of the Diplomatic Academy of Vienna, suggesting that Austria consider joining the North Atlantic Treaty Organization. Meinl-Reisinger expressed support for a public debate on the issue, acknowledging that the current political and public majority remains opposed to NATO membership.
…
Meinl-Reisinger also addressed Russia’s ongoing war against Ukraine, stating that Ukraine seeks peace, while Russia continues its campaign of aggression. She added that if Russian leader Vladimir Putin were genuinely interested in peace, he would have engaged in ceasefire negotiations.
…
Yes, from you. I am not saying that Austria will be attacked by Russia, even though I kind of say it. This feels like an argument with AI.
Don’t try to make your argument mine. It is only you that tries to narrow this on an attack on Austria in order to disprove the necessity of an Austrian membership. I told you what the actual security gains for Austria can be in NATO and those are irrespective of a Russian attack on Austria. So are we finally done with this idea?
And btw, still curious:
Will you blame Russia for its crimes?
No. Where is the gain if Ukraine also has it?
There is no other threat for Austria.
They are guilty of their crimes. If I blame them don’t I imply that somebody else is guilty but I put the blame on Russia?
Ukraine is in the middle of a war. Austria wants these gains before Russia sends hundreds of thousands of troops across the border and massacres villages and bombs cities. Is that really so hard to understand?
I don’t oppose that Russia is a threat to Austria. I oppose that the benefit of an Austrian NATO membership comes only in effect in case of a Russian attack on Austria. And I explained to you why.
What’s hard for me to understand is that you don’t understand that Austria would be fighting that war in Poland and Slovacia.
Again: this isn’t about Austria fighting a war. Can you understand that?
It is about gaining security benefits before a war breaks out.
No, I don’t understand. The security benefits are for that one specific war. It’s the same.
The security benefits come into effect without/before Russia actually attacking.
So does the war before attacking Austria.
It’s essentially the same.