The war in Ukraine and its consequences are also reflected in Austrian defense policy. Yesterday’s session of the National Council meeting there was a cross-party consensus on the need to revise the Austrian Security Strategy from 2013 with regard to current developments and threats. The members of parliament were also unanimous in their approval of a financial upgrade for foreign missions in order to make them more attractive for soldiers in view of the general shortage of personnel.
The revision of the Austrian Security Strategy is intended to take account of the changed assessment of the military threat situation in Europe. According to the Freedom Party initiative, this is more than ten years old and does not include current threat scenarios such as those posed by the war in Ukraine or the risk of a blackout (2414/A(E)). The motion for a resolution was adopted unanimously, taking into account an amendment tabled in the Defense Committee by members of the ÖVP, SPÖ and NEOS. It calls on the Federal Government to draw up the 2013 security strategy as quickly as possible with the involvement of all parliamentary groups represented in the National Council’s Main Committee and taking into account the guidelines of the “strategic compass” of the EU to revise it. On the basis of a NEOS initiative (3132/A(E)), all parliamentary groups are also calling for the Foreign Allowances and Benefits Act (AZHG) to be amended in a joint motion. The aim is to make participation in foreign assignments more attractive in general, in order to be able to ensure a corresponding “staffing level” in the future. The original motion particularly criticized unfavourable pay regulations, which were one of the reasons for the shortage of soldiers deployed abroad. https://militaeraktuell.at/fuer-ein-heer-mit-zukunft/ Cross-party unity on defence policy issues
When Defence Minister Klaudia Tanner took office, a “sustainable trend reversal” was initiated in the armed forces, explained ÖVP defence spokesperson Friedrich Ofenauer, referring to the increases in the defence budget in recent years. Due to the changed geopolitical situation, now was also the right time to adapt the security strategy accordingly. It was important to involve experts and all parliamentary groups in this process and to consider the European “security compass”, as Ofenauer explained. He emphasized the importance of the comprehensive national defence enshrined in the constitution for Austria’s security and ability to defend itself, as “being rich and weak” is “not a good combination”. ÖVP mandatary Manfred Hofinger addressed the security policy relevance of foreign missions and the need to make them more attractive for soldiers. Robert Laimer from the Social Democrats was pleased that “the federal government has now also realized” that the security strategy needs to be renewed. He and his parliamentary group colleague Reinhold Einwallner emphasized the need to involve all parties, as an updated strategy would be “worthless” without broad parliamentary support. According to Laimer, national defence is a task for society as a whole and requires a modern security architecture, which could be realized, for example, through a security center in the Federal Chancellery. He also insisted, as did Rudolf Silvan (SPÖ), on Austrian neutrality, which had proven itself historically.
Volker Reifenberger (FPÖ) recalled that the initiative had originally come from his parliamentary group, demonstrating that the opposition could also make a difference. It was therefore important to involve them in the creation of the new security strategy at an early stage and not just have them “nod it off” at the end. The FPÖ will pay attention to how neutrality as an Austrian “identity feature” is dealt with in this process. According to Reifenberger, the reference to the EU’s “strategic compass” in the joint motion already partially contradicts this. In addition, the development plan for the armed forces should have been enshrined in the constitution so that the project could not be “torpedoed” by another government, Gerhard Kaniak (FPÖ) pointed out. Risks to internal security and national sovereignty in the civilian sector, which could result from a shortage of medicines, for example, must also be taken seriously. For David Stögmüller (Greens), the key question was how Austria positions itself in terms of defense policy within the EU and what neutrality means in concrete terms. He emphasized the dangers currently emanating from Russia, which is “undermining” democracies worldwide, and assured broad parliamentary involvement in the creation of a current security strategy. The Greens are concerned that the European context, the concerns of women in particular in peace policy and climate protection should also be taken into account in the security sector. https://militaeraktuell.at/wir-haben-viele-plaene-in-der-schublade/ Douglas Hoyos-Trauttmansdorff (NEOS) also considered it unacceptable that Russia is still listed as a partner in the current security strategy. Although the federal government has announced a broad and open discourse, it is already imposing restrictions on the opposition, for example with regard to perpetual neutrality. Hoyos-Trauttmansdorff also expressed incomprehension that the national defense report was not being made public in the sense of a broad discussion. Defense Minister Klaudia Tanner was pleased that party politics were largely being left out of these security-related issues. Much had already been achieved through this cross-party cooperation, as she noted with regard to the National Defense Financing Act (LV-FinG), for example. This had created predictability in this area for the first time in the Second Republic. When she took office, Tanner had found an enormous need for investment in various areas, which was now gradually being covered. She attached particular importance to the intellectual defense of the country, as Austria must develop into a “defensive democracy”.
