Rationalist state, revolutionist EU and realist war: Austria in international society

Abstract

This article examines Austria's position as a small, neutral state in the international society as framed by the English School. This examination is chiefly done in the face of the effects of great power conflicts and their impact on Western Europe's society of states. In doing so, the article provides insights to the fundamental puzzles concerning the ways power is managed between states, great and small alike. The article surveys how war (such as in South Ossetia in 2008) and war-like incidents affected Austria's position in the international society and the understanding of its place in great power conflicts between East and West. I argue that neutrality, despite European integration in the context of a peaceful international society, remains a political option for small states such as Austria. This option is especially lively if there is a domestic sentimental attachment to it and sticking to it does not undermine domestic or European and international foreign policy rationale and interests.

Notes

The research for this article was supported by Austrian Science Fund (FWF) project P 25198-G16 Which structure, whose virtue? Realism's premises on men and power. I would like to thank Alain Chong for helpful comments on earlier versions of the article.

¹ Since Austria's official understanding is not one to have developed towards nonalignment, I will keep, when concerning Austria, the term in quotation marks.

² Diplomats working within the EU and/or NATO framework regularly claim that neutrality is not that big an issue within the ‘circles of influence’ either in Brussels or elsewhere.

³ There, Austria is also engaged in military terms within the NATO framework, although it is not a member of the alliance. Austria is, however, a member of NATO's Partnership for Peace (PfP) programme and, since 1998, has been a member of the ‘enhanced PfP’. Many attempts have been made concerning a definition of small states or small powers. Mostly they address three indicators: geographical size, population size and the degree of influence in international affairs. Three kinds of communities are in the scope of research addressing those indicators: micro states (with a population of less than one million, such as some former British colonies), small states in the developed world (such as Austria) and small states in the so-called Third World (Hey 2003, 2; Kramer 1999; Höll 1983; Handel 1981, 10). For some of the earliest attempts at defining small states in international relations, see Fox (1959); Schou and Brundtland (1971).

⁴ On the issue of small states in the EU, see Thorhallsson (2008); Thorhallsson and Wivel (2006).

⁵ This is an analogy to Barbara Tuchman's (2004) well-known book about the dawn of the First World War. An examination of the 2008 war in South Ossetia uses this title as well (Cornell 2009).

⁶ It is an interesting coincidence that in the years surrounding the war in 2008, Georgia itself discussed the ‘neutrality option’.

⁷ Roy Allison, for example, argues that the ‘Russian campaign in Georgia triggered the most significant crisis in Russian foreign relations with western countries since the dissolution of the Soviet Union.’ (Allison 2008, 1169). Others argue that the ‘little’ war ‘shook the world’ (Asmus 2010).

⁸ For an interesting account on how Austria gathered and interpreted information about the Prague Spring in 1968 via the Austrian embassy in Moscow, see Missong (2008).

⁹ Some even speak of the Cold War as a ‘frozen conflict’ that witnessed ‘melting’ in Georgia and that we are now witnessing a ‘resumption’ of the Cold War because of the ‘softness’ of the West regarding its stand towards Russia (Papava 2008).

¹⁰ In terms of mere theory this can be said mainly because, if it was planned, Russia would have declared clearer aims and would have evaluated the achievement of those aims (Kapitonenko 2008; Kusnezowa 2009; Lang 2008).

¹¹ Particularly in the decade following 1998, a bipartisan foreign policy consensus was not given at any time. See, for example, Gehler (2005, 1009–1026).

¹² For the 2001 security and defence ‘doctrine’ and the 2013 security ‘strategy’, see Österreichischer Nationalrat (2001b) and Federal Chancellery of the Republic of Austria (2013).

¹³ Paradoxically, neutrality, for example, is frequently believed to be a main driving force of Austria's economic prosperity and development in the second republic.

¹⁴ Often those are UN peacekeeping missions between two states such as Syria and Israel (e.g. on Mount Hermon where Austria participated for decades but, due to the civil war in Syria, pulled out).

Additional information

Funding

This work was supported by the Austrian Science Fund (FWF) [grant number P 25198-G16].

Notes on contributors

Jodok Troy

Jodok Troy is a researcher, lecturer and project leader of international relations at the University of Innsbruck, Austria. He held a research fellowship at the Center for Peace and Security Studies at Georgetown University, USA and conducted research visits around the globe. His research focuses on religion, ethics and international relations theory and English School theory. He is the author of Christian approaches to international affairs (Palgrave Macmillan 2012) and various editions and journal articles. His current research is funded by the Austrian Science Fund (FWF): P25198-G16 Which structure, whose virtue? Realism's premises on men and power. E-mail: [email protected]