Austria and the war: Vienna made a name for itself – and was met with criticism

The government in Kyiv reacted loudly and indignantly after Austrian Foreign Minister Alexander Schallenberg discussed the possibility of binding Ukraine to the European Union below the threshold of full membership.

According to the Ukrainian Foreign Ministry, this was “strategic short-sighted” and also directed against the “interests of a united Europe”.

Stephen Lowenstein

Political correspondent based in Vienna.

• Follow I follow

The negative response is noteworthy because Viennese skepticism about the possibility of Ukraine joining the EU quickly is nothing new.

Schallenberg, but also Chancellor Karl Nehammer, had already articulated it several times.

The question was "very complex", the negotiations were lengthy and therefore "not the right way" to show solidarity and partnership with Ukraine, Nehammer announced back in March.

When he met the Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy in Kyiv at the beginning of April, he did not express himself differently.

However, when he spoke at the “Media Summit” conference in Lech am Arlberg, Schallenberg did not confine himself to skepticism about an imminent EU perspective for Ukraine.

Rather, he made concrete, constructive proposals for "tailor-made offers for the closest possible connection", not only directing his attention to Ukraine, but also to Georgia and the Republic of Moldova.

For example, he could imagine a system in which these states would be fully involved in specific areas such as energy, transport and the internal market without being formally members of the EU.

It must be affirmed without reservation that Ukraine belongs to Europe and the West.

Not only Austria is skeptical

The statements were also noticed in the Russian media, but not negatively at all.

The APA news agency quotes an official news portal called "news.yandex.ru" on which Schallenberg has advanced to become one of the most important news items of the day with dozens of online reports.

This in turn may have contributed to the harsh Ukrainian reaction, especially since both the Russians and the Ukrainians initially referred to the tabloid headline “Vienna rejects Ukrainian EU accession” and not to Schallenberg's actual statements.

In Vienna, people are by no means alone in their skepticism about Ukraine's early accession to the EU.

At best, this is not said so clearly in other capitals such as The Hague, Berlin or Paris, which does not necessarily do the Ukraine any favors.

Another question, however, is whether it is wise for Austria of all places to expose itself with this truth (as seen there).

Because Vienna is already under suspicion of latent proximity to Russia - the key words are the reception of Putin in 2014 and the famous wedding dance in 2018.

It is therefore not to be assumed that Schallenberg's statements were the result of a concerted action by the government, rather the chancellor's office would be unhappy about the response.

After all, Nehammer had recently raised questions in this direction when he was the first Western head of government to travel to Moscow since the beginning of the Russian war of aggression and paid his respects to Putin – a good two weeks before UN Secretary General Guterres did the same.

The help of the former "Bild" editor-in-chief

Austria is provided with a "permanent neutrality".

Nehammer has repeatedly stated since February 24 that this does not mean being neutral to injustice and aggressive war, and has explicitly criticized the Russian incursion and atrocities.

He also made it a point to visit Kyiv before Moscow and also made sure that no pictures of his meeting with Putin that could have been misused for propaganda purposes were distributed.

Nevertheless, the meaning and purpose of his trip is not really clear, even in retrospect.

She hadn't had any tangible result, and Nehammer hadn't even tried to arouse such an expectation.

In any case, for Nehammer himself it had the effect that he became a figure that was also noticed outside of Austria.

He not only telephoned the EU leadership and the heads of government in Berlin and Paris, but also the Turkish President and the Chinese Prime Minister.

In international media, he made it to the front and start pages, including the New York Times.

Some believe that this profiling is the handwriting of a man who advises Nehammer as party leader of the ÖVP: Kai Diekmann, formerly editor-in-chief of the "Bild" newspaper, now a PR consultant.

To everyone's surprise, Diekmann traveled to both Kyiv and Moscow.

Since Nehammer made these trips in his capacity as chancellor, Diekmann went with him at his own expense – a somewhat nebulous mix of roles that did not go uncriticized at home.

It was Nehammer's wife who introduced the chancellor to Diekmann.

That also drew attention to her.

Katharina Nehammer used to work for ÖVP politicians as a media spokeswoman and in ministerial offices, so she is also a specialist, well networked and of course interested in politics.

When Nehammer made his first visit to Berlin, she accompanied him – also on his own account, as it was said.

She was also occasionally present at staff meetings in the Chancellery.

This free advisory work, so to speak “en famille”, has also been denounced domestically.

From Nehammer's point of view, however, this should be part of the image of a modern family in which the partner brings in his or her professional background.

From this point of view, terms such as “Schattenkanzlerin” (Der Standard) may seem rather misogynistic.