MFG-Aigner: “Neutrality and other questions are completely ignored”
The federal government has said YES – to NATO’s SKYSHIELD system, which is intended to protect Austria from all kinds of air attacks. LAbg. Joachim Aigner, MFG-Austria federal party chairman, has great concerns about compatibility with neutrality, at the same time Aigner warns of the consequences that joining Skyshield could have: namely, Austria’s unforeseeable dependencies and that our country will hardly be able to do so in the affected areas could still decide independently.
First of all, MFG federal party chairman Joachim Aigner denounces the decades of ruinous austerity in the Austrian army, which is now falling on our heads: “Even when the ÖVP and FPÖ were in power, despite countless promises of a contemporary upgrade of our national defense, nothing has changed for the better. Due to this negligent inaction by all parties, it naturally seems obvious and easiest to participate in NATO’s Skyshield project.” This picture of the “defense collapse” is also reflected in a number collected by political scientists at the University of Innsbruck, according to which only more 14 percent of all men and women would defend Austria with weapons. Many people are not even aware that neutrality comes with a duty to defend themselves. Being in favor of neutrality and at the same time showing no willingness to defend yourself is a gross contradiction.
Austria must protect itself
One thing is clear: attacks from the air – for example with fighter jets, missiles or drones – are no longer a complex, unlikely scenario or new military territory, but are part of everyday life in military conflicts. The question arises all the more: Why shouldn’t Austria manage to protect itself from such possible dangers on its own initiative?
The fact is: When it comes to Skyshield, Austria’s perpetual neutrality cannot simply be ignored or neglected, even if this is tried again and again. It is astonishing how some self-proclaimed “experts” bend over backwards and try to gloss over and downplay the fact that this is a 100 percent NATO-driven project. “Austria, neutrality and NATO do not fit together; there is zero room for interpretation”
said Aigner.
Unbelievable argument
The attempts at reassurance that Austria itself has the order to fire for the Skyshield sites positioned in our country are not worth the paper they are written on: These are split-second decisions, it is unthinkable that Austria would be allowed to overrule the NATO generals here, it would have the right to do so a lot at stake. Neutral Austria is a very small country. A rocket traveling at 3,000 km/h takes less than a minute from the state border to the Vienna area and less than two minutes from the northern federal border to Linz. Air strikes on aircraft, drones or missiles would therefore have to take place over foreign territory due to the short distance to the border. Even experts doubt whether this is compatible with neutrality.
It is clear to anyone who is even remotely interested in history and politics that NATO and the USA would never, ever allow control of Skyshield to be taken away from them in an emergency. Statements by international law expert Walter Obwexer, according to which “participation in Skyshield cannot be viewed as participation in a military alliance,” are “absolute whitewashing. I can also say that oranges are blue. And if I tell myself that often enough, I’ll eventually believe it,” says Joachim Aigner, shaking his head.
Worthless additional declaration
Also not very credible: The additional declaration of intent required by Austria stated that it wanted to participate in joint procurement, training and exercise measures within the framework of Skyshield, but not in ‘operational measures’. Joachim Aigner: “It sounds like I’m buying a car but don’t want to drive it at all. At the same time, Chancellor Nehammer claims that the responsibility for which flying object is fought and when remains in Austria. Now the Chancellor has to explain to me why pressing the red button is not an ‘operational measure’. More swearing is almost impossible.”
Imagine the scenario that Austria is actually allowed to determine the targets of the attack itself and it is a false alarm or a mix-up: “Which Austrian politician, in this case probably the Federal President, would be responsible for civilian casualties or even the triggering of a military conflict?” asks Joachim Aigner. False shoot-downs with hundreds of deaths – for example of civilian airliners – have occurred repeatedly in the past and, given cyber attacks and increasingly complex systems, cannot be ruled out in the future.
Austrian Skyshield locations as “attractive” potential attack targets
And not to forget: Skyshield bases would be preferred targets of an aggressor in the event of a conflict.
Joachim Aigner: “Or does anyone seriously believe that an attacker would then make a distinction and not attack a NATO Skyshield site just because it is in Austria?”
Skyshield would be just the beginning
Even if the current political situation is as it is at the moment, Joachim Aigner warns against quick decisions and the resulting one-sided political dependencies: “Once Austria is part of this NATO project, there is no way out. And Skyshield is just the beginning, every military expert says that, even if only in secret.” The Russia sanctions have also shown that a too one-sided view of conflicts and a short-sighted approach does not lead to the desired result, even extreme can have a damaging effect on one’s own country.
Aigner: “Take national defense into your own hands!”
As is well known, Austria wants to invest the sum of 16.6 billion euros in the urgently needed upgrade and retrofitting of the Federal Army by 2032. “The funds planned for Skyshield amounting to a further two to four billion euros would be in good hands there,” said Aigner. The MFG plan: Building its own, independent air defense system that Austria can control and deploy 100 percent independently. “Especially in the area of self-defense, you can only rely on one thing: yourself and no one else,” says Aigner. It could be built on the once proven “Goldhood” surveillance and national defense system, which Austria could further develop on its own. In any case, it shouldn’t fail because of the money – see Skyshield.
If Skyshield, then referendum
An undertaking such as joining the NATO Skyshield project massively interferes with the lives and self-image of neutral Austria and its residents. For MFG there is therefore only one way: “This question can only be decided in a referendum. If joining Skyshield is actually as unavoidable and desired by a large majority of the population as the mainstream media keeps telling us, no one needs to fear this referendum,” said Joachim Aigner.
However, the limited number of participating countries shows that the Europe-wide enthusiasm for a common missile shield may not be that far off.
France, Italy, Poland and Spain, for example, are not included – not least because they consider the logic of the “Cold War” to be outdated.
Austria must go its own way
“Russia is no longer the Soviet Union. “Russia’s strategic interest lies in eastern Ukraine and northern Europe,” says military expert and retired general Günther Greindl. He also takes the view that Austria, as a neutral country, should set up its own air defense. With an active peace policy and a credible national defense on the ground and in the air, Austria could achieve much more for the peace order in Europe, said Greindl.
Postscript Joachim Aigner: “Independent of the Skyshield project: Austria has, without exception, done well with its ‘perpetual neutrality’ for almost 70 years. If you see it differently, please give me an example of when and where this neutrality had a detrimental effect. I don’t know what motivates the SPÖ, ÖVP, the Greens and NEOS to jeopardize this valuable asset so carelessly time and time again.
“
Questions & Contact:
MFG Austria
(+43 732) 93167 6500
presse@mfg-oe.at
https://www.mfg-oe.at/