Austria no longer lacks information about the dangers facing Europe. What it lacks is the political will to draw the obvious conclusion. The threat is visible, the country’s military weaknesses are measurable and its dependence on others is clear. Yet the idea of joining NATO is still treated by many politicians as if it were an attack on Austria’s identity.
That hesitation is rooted partly in the stories Austria has told about itself. After the Second World War, the country built a national identity around the belief that it had been mainly a victim of Nazi Germany. Later debates, especially the controversy surrounding former President Kurt Waldheim, challenged that comfortable picture. They showed that a country does not become innocent simply by repeating the same version of its past, reported by Die Presse.
Neutrality has become the foreign-policy expression of a similar illusion. Its legal basis is less absolute than public debate often suggests. Austria’s neutrality is not part of the 1955 State Treaty. It was established through a separate constitutional law and is generally not considered one of the fundamental principles of the constitution. In theory, it could be changed by a two-thirds majority in parliament, without a referendum.
The Neutrality Act prevents Austria from joining military alliances or allowing foreign military bases on its territory. It does not explicitly ban the delivery of weapons to another country. At the same time, European Union treaties require member states to provide assistance if another member is attacked.
This creates an uncomfortable contradiction. In a serious European conflict, Austria could face pressure to show solidarity while trying to preserve its traditional neutrality. Without credible military strength, neutrality risks becoming less a strategy than a hope.
Austria already works closely with NATO through the Partnership for Peace and has supported missions in Bosnia and Kosovo. Finland joined NATO in 2023, followed by Sweden in 2024, after both countries reassessed their security needs. Their decisions were not betrayals of history but responses to changing reality.
Austria should consider the same path. NATO membership would not have to mean permanent dependence on the United States. Europe needs a stronger defence role of its own within the alliance. For Austria, the choice is becoming clear: help build European security or continue relying on others to provide it.
