Credit: Matthias Wurz

“The idea came to me when my mother died – she was 89,” Walter Schels’ thoughts rested for a moment, his eyes glanced at the audience and then smiled gently. The 73-year-old award-winning German photographer, dressed in all-black and his camera hanging casually from his left shoulder as he speaks.

“Unlike my sister, I could not get myself to stay the night when, as it turned out, she passed away. But I had photographed her before I left that evening.” You could not help but to be moved; and yet Schels’ inability to confront his own fear about dying led to his most remarkable project: photographing faces of people nearing the end of their lives, and then shortly after they passed away. It were these photographs that deservedly earned him the second prize of the World Press Photo Award in 2004.

Walter Schels and Spiegel’ science editor Beate Lakotta – now Schels’ wife – published this remarkable collection of short biographies, their illnesses and consequently the circumstances of death, enriched by Schels’ breathtaking vivid black-and-white photographs. The book, entitled Noch mal Leben vor dem Tod. Wenn Menschen sterben, suggests entirely different view of dying, or rather living without illusions or pretense.

It is, apparently, not only a comfort to those whose live is about to end, but also to relatives and friends. But Schels’ photographs express the unspeakable for those who remain left behind – and many were drawn to the Stadmuseum Graz on Nov 3, 2009 to see Walter Schels’ work. The museum’s director, Otto Hochreiter, is responsible for securing this short but nevertheless powerful exhibition, extraordinary in its simplistic concept and design – an abridged version of the book, and in a way the attempt of breaking a taboo of not talking about death in Western society.

For the opening, however, we find ourselves just outside the the exhibition hall on the second level. The audience of about 100 followed with great tension the photographer’s talk, but you could feel the impatience from some evidently eager to look at the work of art behind the closed doors. But Schels made me understand his fear of death is when talks about his childhood in Germany.

“After the second World War had ended, my grandmother was missing. So, I joined my grandfather to look for her, among the dead.” His hands movements are lively, and his white almost shoulder-long hair twirled. “So I saw many dead bodies or its parts at that time. And there were many coffins, and my grandfather used to open them to see if his wife was inside one of them. That is when I became fearful of dying. But at my age now, that moment has come much closer.”

More to follow soon!

Photo: Students protesting in the streets of Vienna, Oct. 29. Photo Credit: Cremer / Der Standard.

“I feel already well-equipped, and speaking English daily will hopefully not cause me to forget German,” Johannes Hahn – the last name Hahn translated into English means rooster or cock – replied confidently in his first public interview with the daily Der Standard of Oct. 28, when asked about his English language knowledge after his surprise nomination as Austria’s EU Commissioner. The current Federal Minister for Science and Research, in office since January 2007, will be Austria’s most influential European politician as part of Emanuel Barroso’s second European Commission.

With the unanimous decision by the Austrian government of Oct. 27 lunchtime, the show-down between the two coalition partners – Werner Faymann’s Social democrats and Josef Pröll’s Conservative ÖVP – eventually found an abupt end. The contest of nomination was mere on the surface, though, as Faymann declared already months ago that his party – though strongest in the Austrian Parliament – would not nominate a commissioner, but played a risky tactical game of which Conservative nominee they would support.

Political Tactics

Only in recent weeks Hahn’s name appeared as a compromise candidate of the government, as the Conservatives did not intend to send current Austrian Commissioner Benita Ferrero-Waldner again to Brussels, though favored by Faymann; and for tactical reasons, the Social democrats would not support former Vice Chancellor Wilhem Molterer, who famously had quit the coalition with the Social democrats in July 2008 which led to snap elections.

More significantly, Molterer as Finance Minister, was primarily responsible for the disastrous attempts of privatizing Austria’s national airline Austrian Airlines, finally settled with the new owner Lufthansa in May 2009 but only after prolonged investigations by the European Commission. So, Hahn’s name surfaced eventually, and his nomination became a mutual convenience in the end:

Firstly, Hahn also still leads the ÖVP’s Vienna party section, and he would have led one of the weakest Conservative provincial party organization into election in October 2010. Hahn’s departure deprives the ÖVP of its best-known, though rather uncharismatic, leading candidate. So, Faymann set scores even with his former protege Michael Häupl, Vienna’s mayor and whose government he was once part of until he became party leader in July 2008, combating the fear of heavy electoral losses his party has suffered in recent provincial elections.

In an attempt to rescue the expected dramatic personnel situation of the Conservatives in Vienna, Hahn initially signalled that he would like to remain the party leader, as he wrongly assumed no conflict of interest, Barroso’ office clearly rejected the idea. Faymann’s move takes effect and Austria has nominated a Commissioner with little understanding or enthusiasm for European politics.

Secondly, the Conservative party leadership is able to elegantly depose of a troublesome minister, who has recently come under severe pressure by students occupying university facilities in a defiant gesture of demanding more money for a seriously under-funded university system. Since Oct. 21, student protests of some 2,000 persons have culminated in the occupation of the University of Vienna’s main auditorium and is still ongoing, entering its 10^th day today.

Additionally, Minister Hahn is faced with a wave of German students that have flooded into the public universities ever since the abolition of tuition fees took effect with the current academic year – see my commentary. Hahn and the Conservatives, objecting the abolition of those fees, fell victim of a political, pre-electoral tactics of the Social democrats together with the opposition parties, FPÖ, the Greens and BZÖ – see also my commentary of September 2008. Consequently, Hahn opened the debate anew of re-introducing tuition fees on Oct. 2, promising “fair tuition fees and many more scholarships.”

CERN and other ‘Disasters’

The appointment of Johannes Hahn as minister with the responsibility for the state university system was a surprise as his political career showed no specific affinity for higher education issues. He was welcomed with skepticism, particularly once the suspicion surfaced that Hahn’s own P.h.D. thesis of 1987 might in part be plagiarized.

Matters turned especially sour on May 8, 2009 when he announced one-sidedly that Austria would cancel its membership at Swiss-based European Organization for Nuclear Research CERN. Austria has been a member since 1959, and CERN’s main function is to provide the particle accelerators and other infrastructure needed for high-energy physics research, and it is also noted for being the birthplace of the World Wide Web. But on May 18, Chancellor Faymann forced a retreat on the decision.

It made one thing clear: Hahn is by no means firm in his political opinions. That is the strength of the current protest movement that Austrian universities exposed to. Oct 29 saw one of the largest protests yet with a demonstration of some 40,000 students. But the occupation of the main auditorium of the University of Vienna, the spread of such activities to many other universities all over the country, is not the work of the politically structures student union (Österreichische Hochschülerschaft), but primarily organized through social media networks, particularly Facebook and Twitter.

One of the groups – Audimax Besetzung in der Uni Wien – Die Uni brennt! – has gained immense importance as a platform of coordination and communication to the outside world. With more than 22,000 members and constantly growing by the hour it has gained an enormous political potential that traditional party politics has not been able to instrumentalize or influence.

Austria got its first major Twitter ‘revolution’ – not quite like the Iran protests, but rather more evolutionary. And Hahn’s initial refusal to negotiate with the protesters showed that politics has no intention yet to take the protests seriously.

Georg Hoffmann-Ostenhof, political commentator of the weekly news magazine profil, predicts that the future of the protest movement is uncertain: “It could fizzle out, without having achieved anything; like many protests of the past, it could radicalize and crush at the public’s opinion. It could however, hold out some time, seek allies and might even spread into other areas.”

The protests have at least achieved one thing: Hahn’s removal from the ministry by his appointment to Brussels. The worst signal Austria could send to Europe. But it might offer a restart, both in Austria’s Higher Education system and for Hahn.

“It would be illogic for Austria, but (heading the directorate) for maritime affairs and fisheries would have some charm, for sure,” Hahn joked in the interview with Der Standard. Who, in any case, would entrust him with educational affairs on a European level?

Austrian students have made up their mind of Hahn. On one of the large banners shown at the demonstration reads: “Hahn, you cock!” He will, undoubtedly, ‘crow’ in Brussels instead.

Photos: Boris Bergant chairing the discussion / Erhard Busek opening the session / Zoe Schneeweiss debating. Credit: Matthias Wurz

“It is most frightening to realize that history has not taught us a lesson ,” Boris Bergant uttered the words softly. The Slovenian radio and television journalist, current Vice President of the European Broadcasting Union (EBU), addressed a distinguished audience of media professionals from Central and South-east Europe. His voice seems pressed and slightly nervous, but full of emotions. Before he could continue, however, his remarks were interrupted by enthusiastic applause.

It was Oct. 16, the evening event of the Standards of Evidence symposium, organized by the Commission on Radio and Television Policy for Central, East and South-east Europe alongside with the Forum Alpbach. The scheduled panel discussion on ‘The Media and the Financial Crisis’ with high-profile media professionals held at Vienna’s Haus der Musik, was preceded by a short but not less dignified award ceremony for Boris Bergant. The 61-year-old is recipient of the Dr. Erhard Busek SEEMO 2009 Award for Better Understanding. His short acceptance speech was a moving recollection of the Balkan’s troubled, repetitious and bloody 20^th century history.

The SEEMO Award 2009 Ceremony

Austria’s former Vice Chancellor and President of the Forum Alpbach as well as Coordinator of the Southeast European Cooperative Initiative (SECI), Erhard Busek, was not only but also the benefactor of one of Europe’s most prestigious media awards but also host of tonight’s award ceremony. Just a few introductory words were needed for one of the finest and eloquent journalists the Balkan region has. “You have to earn your award,” Busek amicably addressed the delightful award recipient when he referred to the following debate that Bergant would chair.

Boris Bergant, who was predominately working in the field of foreign policy, has nevertheless built a reputation in reporting of minority-related issues. So, the question is a valid one and the award recipient posed it rhetorically:

“Did I do anything special?” and his smile seemed to indicate that he hasn’t done more that his job.”But these days also the President of the United States received a prize,” he commented jokingly but slightly reserved on Barack Obama as Nobel Peace laureate, and with a twinkle in his eye he added that “it seems to be the fashion, more or less, to give prizes not for what you have done, but for the expectation that you will do something good.” At that point Bergant certainly won the audience with his charm.

But in the words of Oliver Vujovic, Secretary General of the Vienna-based South East Europe Media Organisation (SEEMO), Boris Bergant certainly is a worthy recipient: “The prize is important as moral support for press freedom and democratization in South East Europe,” and Bergant’s integrity and outstanding contributions for better communication in raising the understanding of South East Europe, he added, was evidently key to the jury’s decision.

“I am both proud and sad that I am also someone from the Balkans,” Bergant expressed with confidence. And with reference to the 1990s, where massacres between the ethnic communities relived the past of the 1940s, his comment of not having learned from history was a compelling one.

“We must not allow the hatred between the Balkan nations ever be re-ignited,” Bergant appealed insistently. The massacre of Srebrenica of July 1995, he indicated, was a symbol of that hatred. And it’s hoped to be of the past.

The Panel Discussion

Once Bergant was presented with the award certificate, the pictures were taken – a warm handshake with Busek – he took his seat at the podium along with Michael Mauritz, spokesperson of the Erste Bank Group, Zoe Schneeweiss, Bureau Chief of Bloomberg News in Vienna, and Petar Pountchev, CEO and Director of Belgrade’s Radio 3.

“Today everybody is affected by the crisis: What a good start!” Bulgarian radio-presenter Petar Pountchev opened the debate with a provocative statement. Certainly the financial crisis of 2008 is a great chance for journalists, Pountchev is convinced. At Belgrade’s Radio 3 station the pace changed, the journalists are re-energized, he shared his experience:

“We have 1,100 % growth since then, when everyone complains we are going to die,” he added with a dry voice, “we are not recovering from the crisis – the crisis is recovering from us.” A good time to be in journalism, evidently. Or rather, those who professionally following the crisis.

“It’s a fantastic time to be a financial journalist,” Zoe Schneeweiss seconded, and her confident smile is disarming. The 30-year-old journalist heads the local Bloomberg News in Austria, and there is great demand for good writers in that field, she added, as companies require more than ever well-researched financial information, particularly from the Central and Southern-European regions.

But the story is yet different for general interest media, Erste Bank spokesperson Michael Mauritz indicated. “Often we are confronted with journalists who are not able to analyze financial reports,” he offered his insights, and he ascribed this to a media crisis.

“When you pay journalists peanuts, you only get monkeys,” he concluded pointedly and attributed the financial disaster many media outlets find themselves in of providing free material through their websites.

“Just like the mobile phone companies in the late 1990s, the newspapers repeat the same mistakes by providing the same content free online,” and with a serious and vivid glance into the audience he predicted, that “it will be hard to convince customers that they have to pay.” But this is, what newspapers in particularly will have to do in order to survive. Otherwise the quality severely suffers and more readers might go adrift.

On that note, Erhard Busek concluded the session with the invitation to join him and the speakers at the exquisite buffet.

“It’s for free,” remarked jokingly, “ I hope it’s something worthwhile.”

Susan Rigvava-Dumas and Project Two performing at the Café Central, Oct. 4, 2009. Clip kindly provided by Reinhard Bimashofer.

“Oh, dream maker, you heart breaker,” the lower sensual range of Dutch-born actress and Mezzo-Soprano Susan Rigvava-Dumas’ powerful voice floated across the neo-Renaissance Café Central. And almost whispering with delicate accompaniment of the rhythm section of the Vienna-based mini-Big-Band Project Two – “wherever you’re going I’m going your way.”

It’s Sunday, Oct. 4, about 8.30 pm, and with John Mercer’s 1961 award-winning hit ‘Moon River’ the band’s eclectic performance that day – the last of the Jazz Live im Café Central concerts – reaches undeniably its climax. Famously set to music by Henri Mancini for Audrey Hepburn, band leader and trombonist Karl Heinz Czadek’s sensitive arrangement suited the ensemble well and brought out the best of the skillful and experienced jazz musicians, indeed some of Austria’s finest.

Suddenly, with the key up also the pace changes and the character of ‘Moon River’ brightens, and Rigvava-Dumas reaches out for the high-powerful range. And while the audience is enjoying a cup of exquisite Wiener Mélange and cake, or a lavish early traditional dinner at one of Vienna’s oldest literary café’s, the nine instrumentalists are seated in the center.

Rigvava-Dumas is well-known among others as a Musical start– despite her classical training as a singer – especially of the role of Mrs. Danvers in Vienna’s impressive Rebecca production. And as her collaboration with Project Two shows, she evidently feels at home in performing jazz as well. She matches the band well musically, also wearing all-black: Dressed in dark trousers, a sleeveless jacket and a black tie cheekily around the neck, she equally conquers the packed audience with her charm as well as her performance.

Given the great success of tonight’s performance, one is surprised to learn that the short cycle of four Sunday concerts discontinues. The Café Central certainly is an unusual venue for Jazz, but the pieces from the Great American Song Book of many jazz standards – in exquisite arrangements by band leader Karl Heinz Czadek – complement the elegant ambience of the venue.

As for tonight, the enthusiastic audience demanded encores, and the evening concluded with an arrangement of Michael Jackson’s Thriller (1984), one of pop star’s signature songs, famously produced by jazz legend Quincy Jones.

“We have very little in common with pop music,” Czadek explains, many in the audience agree with silent head nods. “This is a different musical world.” But the purely instrumental arrangement was full of jazzy esprit, a fast-paced and powerful finish.

For those who missed the concerts in September, the same formation, however, performs at Jazzland, next appearance on Oct. 31, and the Christmas concert on Dec 22.

The RSO Vienna works councils, Geert Langelaar (left) and Bernhard Ziegler(right) at the press conference of Sept. 11, 2009. Photo Credit: Matthias Wurz

“The RSO Vienna and the Gordian knot; that’s how you might want to call the whole affair,” works council Bernhard Ziegler paused for a moment and the audience was on the edge of their seats for him to continue. Dressed in black, wearing the orchestra’s T-shirt with defiance, he looked up from his notes and smiled nervously. Little did one expect that the press conference on the uncertain future of the Vienna Radio Symphony Orchestra (RSO Vienna) on Sept. 11 at Presseclub Concordia, would include a short excursion into Greek mythology.

But Ziegler was not referring to the so-called ‘Alexandrian Solution’, when Alexander the Great famously cut the knot of his ox-cart with his sword as he could untie it – the legend that led to his conquest of the Persian Empire in 333 B.C. However, the well-read orchestra’s works council cited a lesser-known version of the story, where the Macedonian monarch opened the knot by simply pulling out the cart’s dowel.

Scene I: Unravelling the ‘Gordian Knot’

The same  indeed is true today for the RSO Vienna, Ziegler concluded – one of Austria’s most prestigious orchestras fighting for its survival: not the drastic action, like ‘outsourcing’ the orchestra of the Austrian Broadcasting Corporation (ORF) or even its dissolution is needed, but the simple solution, the provision of adequate funding for the RSO Vienna, as it requires only about EUR 8.5 million – about 0.8% of the corporation’s annual budget – plus EUR 1.2 million revenue generated by the orchestra each year.

Besides, the RSO Vienna celebrates the 40^th anniversary of its foundation in fall 2009. The exquisite programming ranges from Mozart and Beethoven to present day, including 15 premiere performances of contemporary composers. The orchestra indeed covers a prominent spot in Austria’s musical life by promoting “music that begins with Gustav Mahler, and does not end there”, as Ziegler added, hence promoting contemporary Austrian composers. The list of those is long, and Friedrich Cerha, Heinz Karl Gruber, Olga Neuwirth or Kurt Schwertsik are just the prominent ones.

At Austria’s largest annual festival of contemporary music, Wien Modern, initiated in 1988 by Claudio Abbado, the RSO Vienna is an essential cornerstone of the programming, co-organized by the Musikverein and Wiener Konzerthaus. It was no surprise that their Managing Directors, Dr. Thomas Angyan (Musikverein) and Bernhard Kerres (Konzerthaus) joint those who are seriously concerned for the future of the orchestra.

The festival Wien Modern is just impossible without the RSO Vienna, Angyan and Kerres stated in unison. The disappearance of such an eminent ensemble would have disastrous consequences for the city of Vienna as a musical center.

Conesquently, Angyan and Kerres took their seats at the press conference, prominently chaired by Die Presse’s Dr. Walter Gürtelschmied, seconded by Ziegler’s colleague Geert Langelaar, as well as the orchestra’s current Music Director, French conductor Bertrand de Billy. Roland Geyer, Intendant of the Theater an der Wien equally lent his voice in support, as did the pianist Paul Gulda.

“For me it is unthinkable that the RSO Vienna might not exist (in the nearer future)”, Roland Geyer added defiantly. Since 2007 the ensemble serves as pit orchestra – shared with the Vienna Symphony Orchestra – at his Theater an der Wien, and just a few days later on Sept. 17, Scottish-born conductor Donald Runnicles would lead the orchestra in an acclaimed performance of Benjamin Britten’s Death in Venice.

“I have engaged the orchestra at the Theater an der Wien up to the 2012-13 season,” he added in an uncompromising tone, “and I am assuming that the orchestra will be performing at the opera house then.”

Scene II: Online Petition and Facebook Group

Violinist Johannes Fleischmann (left) and Roland Geyer (right), Intendant of the Theater an der Wien. Photo Credit: Matthias Wurz

In a different way, however, but very simple and effective in raising awareness of the RSO Vienna’s uncertain future was Johannes Fleischmann’s online petition in aide of the orchestra.

Fleischmann, a young Austrian violinist, who, while still studying at the Music University in Vienna, regularly performed with prestigious orchestras in Vienna, initiated  an online petition on March 28, 2009 and promoted it just through a Facebook group (Rettet das RSO) and word of mouth. The site is simple in its message and design: Preventing the ‘death’ of an orchestra. The response was overwhelming as 30,761 (Sept. 24) individuals listed – a staggering 1,231 pages –  have signed the petition to date, among others stars like Placido Domingo, Oscar-nominee Austrian actor Karl Markovics or the Nobel Laureate Elfriede Jelinek.

The possibility of closing down Austria’s only Radio Orchestra has certainly created an outcry from musicians and music professionals worldwide. As of Apr. 2, 2009, the future of the RSO is in disarray: Due to financial reasons, the ORF management has publicly acknowledged shutting down the ensemble of about 100 players was a viable option. In an unprecedented step, the orchestra manager, Christiane Goller, resigned a few weeks later as she evidently felt abandoned by the ORF Management.

“This is not the end today, it is the beginning,” Fleischmann indicated his determination to continue, “ and the activities will only cease when the RSO is saved.” It is hoped, so Fleischmann, that many more will sign the petition as to create public pressure on politics to take action for financial support.

Scene III: Betrand de Billy’s Battle

French Conductor Bertrand de Billy at the press conference, in disbelief. Photo Credit: Matthias Wurz

Conductor Bertrand de Billy, since September 2002 the RSO Vienna’s Music Director, was clearly not amused about the ORF management plans. Already on Jun. 27, 2008, in a ‘private’ press conference, not sanctioned by the ORF, he spoke of fears of plans to shut down the orchestra.

Ever since his appointment, de Billy courageously fought attempts of outsourcing the orchestra. And in direct words, the spirited French conductor reminds politicians that the ORF is a news corporation governed by public law with a cultural and educational mandate, and therefore it is the state’s responsibility to retain the RSO Vienna and provide sufficient financing.

“There is nothing more damning for the orchestra than uncertainty,” de Billy added passionately, who has lifted the RSO Vienna to international acclaim and evidently hates to see his achievements go down the drain. But desperate times call for desperate remedies, and so in 2008 the ORF management revived plans of breaking up the ORF corporate structure.

The latest financial figures, nevertheless, show how serious the situation is for the broadcasting corporation, with an expected debt of at least EUR 53 million, the most recent estimates are at EUR 60 million for 2009. The financial situation worsened in the second half of 2008 with a significant drop in advertisement sales due to the international economic crisis, and in 2009, the corporation expects about EUR 30 million less advertisement revenues, far below of the budgeted estimates.

The ORF’s debt  might significantly reduced if the government were to refund the TV and radio license fees waived for those who are exempted because of unemployment or low income, which amounted to EUR 57 million in 2008. But politicians are reluctant to do so, as national debt in the current economic crisis will rise exuberantly in the years to come.

The financial crisis ventilated the management plans of outsourcing the orchestra, where the ORF would guarantee the orchestra’s substance only for seven more years. And as of 2011, the the RSO Vienna would have to generate an additional EUR 1 million revenue without public support from either the City of Vienna or the state budget. A scenario de Billy strongly contested as the orchestra would not be able to survive, and dismissed the arguments stemming from the financial crisis.

“We have a financial crisis, yes, but it is not responsible for everything,” he stated in an interview with the Austrian daily Der Standard on Apr. 3, 2009. “The dissolution of the RSO will not save the ORF.” A phrase reiterated today.

Also de Billy’s appeal to the audience to fight for the orchestra on Mar. 26, 2009 at the beginning of a performance or Richard Strauss’ Don Juan followed by the world premiere of Austrian composer Thomas Larcher’s Violin Concerto at the Musikverein, was as legendary as his press conferences.

“I am glad, that this time I am not organizing a press conference,” the conductor commented jokingly. And with reference to the orchestra’s 40^th concert season, de Billy added “The orchestra is younger than me. I am 44 years old, and I also like to stay young.”

Scene IV: Endangering Musical Quality

The conductor and orchestral musicians, side by side: Bertrand de Billy (left) and Geert Langelaar (right). Photo Credit: Matthias Wurz

Once the excitement and discussion of the press conference ebbed off, Dutch-born violinist and workers council Geert Langelaar took some time to enlighten us on the drama backstage in an informal talk. Having graduated from the Music University in Vienna, where he was admitted to the class of violinist Günther Pichler (Alban Berg Quartet), Langelaar joint the orchestra permanently in December 1987.

“None other has done as much as de Billy. Without him and his action, the RSO might not have survived in earlier outsourcing attempts, “ Langelaar comments with a soft but serious tone. Nvertheless, the current situation is unprecedented indeed and certainly leaves its toll on the musicians.

Not surprisingly, Apr. 2, 2009 was a day he remembered well: It was late afternoon when the press release with the possible dissolution of the orchestra went public and was made known to the orchestra just before the performance that evening, a concert performance of Hector Berlioz’s La Damnation de Faust at the Konzerthaus.

“Despite the difficult circumstances, it was still one of the best performances we ever did,” Langelaar added thoughtfully. And he confirmed the amazing musical development of the orchestra under de Billy’s direction.

“He felt it was important also to study the Classical Period and perform its works in concert, so that the RSO has a beautiful ensemble and sound quality that also is then audible in contemporary music.” And so the ensemble changed, Langelaar added, “it has become very young and grew from a medium quality orchestra to one of the top.”

But it is not the quality that bleaks the orchestra’s future, but the talk of closure. But even if the RSO Vienna survives this crisis, the artistic damage has already been done.

“The loss of excellent players to more economically sound orchestras shows its toll,” Langelaar’s face is full of concern. “So, announcements like those of Theater an der Wien Director Roland Geyer today are very helpful to the orchestra’s survival.”

But politics needs to act, he reinstated the press conference’s message. Three demands were put onto the table, which also requests the inclusion of the RSO Vienna in the ORF Rundfunkgesetz (Broadcasting Law), so that the orchestra becomes part of the ORF’s mandate. And certainly no outsourcing of the orchestra, as currently suggested; but it all boils down to finances. The question is, whether politicians will take notice.

Signing the petition, at least, should force them to listen to the demands: www.onlinepetition.at

I admit: I have cast my vote in the elections to the European Parliament at about 10.40 am this morning. So, I am one of about 35 to 40 percent of the Austrian electorate – my estimation – that by the end of the day will have cast their vote for the 17 Austrian seats in the European Parliament. In 2004, 42.5% went to the polls.

There were a few novelties for me: For the first time, I made my way to the polling station without any idea who I am going to vote. As resident of Vienna’s most-populated district Favoriten, it is a five-minute walk to the primary school at Keplerplatz, right at the administrative center of Vienna’s 10^th district, just off the underground station of the same name and the pedestrian Favoritenstrasse.

While attentatively walking through the streets at a humid but cloudy Sunday morning, I recall No Mercy’s 1996-hit ‘Where Do You Go?’ Indeed, where is Europe heading, I wonder.

My uncertainty began in January 2009: Johannes Voggenhuber of the Austrian Greens and one of the influential and knowledgeable Austrian MEP was axed by his own party – see my commentary.

The problem was not primarily that of exchange of leading candidates of one of Austria’s pro-European parties; the position of MEP candidate Ulrike Lunacek and party leader Eva Glawischnig was unclear and clouded by a disappointing result of the general election of September 2008.

Among Austrian ‘European’ MEPs, I noticed the Social Democrats Herbert Bösch and Hannes Swoboda, as well as the Conservative Otmar Karas. It was a painstaking process to reach a decision, and but middle of May I was finally certain whom I will support in the Jun. 7 elections.

But on Jun. 2, the disastrous final television debate of all the leading candidates represented either in the Austrian or European Parliament on ORF. It was an all-time low performance of all political parties, which added to the openly racist hate campaign by the far-right FPÖ. Bizarrely, Austria’s enfant terrible in the European Parliament, Hans Peter Martin – he scored the third place with about 14% in 2004 – suddenly seemed a viable option: God almighty, Europe, where do you go?

Just two days ago, on Jun. 5, I was invited to a public talk, ‘The Faces of Europe’, with Austria’s EU Commissioner Benita Ferrero-Waldner at the Fachhochschule of the bfi – rather a personal conversation in front of an interested audience, moderated by Der Standard’s Eric Frey. The Festsaal was absolutely packed with more than 200 people – the university staff hastily added chairs, but still a few had to stand or sit on radiators near the window.

The inspiring talk showed, that even on a warm summery Friday evening, the interested public can be mobilized. Richard Kühnel, head of the EU Commission here in Austria, who opened the evening, had a gloomy feeling about the upcoming elections.

In a short conversation after the event had finished, again the final television debate was the point of anger: “This will be an election of the frustrated,” and the sound in his voice was sarcastic but with a clear tone of concern.

“Just when things are finally going our way” – the global economic crisis has sparked a stronger support in the European institutions, and there was even a chance of an increase in electoral participation on Jun. 7 – “the Austrian politicians certainly have not done any favors in the debate, and we have to start from square one again.”

These were the thoughts when I walked through the streets of Favoriten to the polling station – a district traditionally dominated by the FPÖ, and some of the controversial clashes took place here in the recent weeks.

In desperation, I glance at the election posters I come across at almost every street lamp: One of the rare posters of Hans Peter Martin is the first one at the lower exit of Keplerplatz underground station – promising, he were the only one to check on the almighty powerful bureaucracy in Brussels.

As I turn into Favoritenstrasse, the blue-colored posters of the Conservatives – in hope of gaining the lead position this time (32.7% in 2004) – clearly dominate the scene here. In front of the Keplerkirche and the primary school, Ernst Strasser, their leading candidate, stares at me every few meters with the serious look and the message that no one can overtake Europe, nor Austria. On the other side, the second-ranked youngish Otmar Karas appeals for directly cast votes, hoping to outsmart the lead position of Strasser.

A few of the Conservative posters are torn down or small green stickers were affixed on the text or eyes. As it turns out, these were of the Green party warning of Strasser with a word game of Grasser (Karlheinz Grasser, former Austrian Finance Minister). The Greens (12.89% in 2004) are notably not present otherwise, which evidently accounts for their current political estate.

I take a short detour further up Favoritenstrasse towards Reumannplatz to Viktor-Adler-Markt. This is the FPÖ’s stronghold in terms of election campaigning. Heinz-Christian Strache appears here almost weekly, and the metal police barricades – now piled up just off the market – are an inbuilt feature in election times.

But the square at the end of the market is dominated by posters of the political left: the Social Democrats (33.33% in 2004) with leading candidate Hannes Swoboda, promoting Austria’s ‘A’ Team for Europe one a red background; and the Communist Party – with the exception of the city of Graz and the province of Styria no political factor – argues that Austria should leave the EU, as “we” should not pay for the responsibility of the economic crisis.

The FPÖ posters, on the other hand, are affixed just a little further down at the crossing of Gudrunstrasse, and are almost unrecognizable, as the racist annotations of the campaign evidently infuriated many. But there is little else the FPÖ (a low 6.3% in 2004) needs to do – the premature release of trends and partial results from the Netherlands on Friday morning shows that far-right provocations helps mobilizing the protest vote. If predications are correct in Austria, the FPÖ will triple – at least – its share of votes.

I turn back to Keplerplatz, pass the church and enter the school to cast my vote. I am still thinking whom to vote for, and even when I get the ballot paper from the officials and enter the booth, I still have no clue where to put my cross.

While glancing through the candidate lists in the booth I recall some of the last opinion polls. The two large parties are likely to loose dramatically (both somewhere between 27 and 29%), but who stays first?   Interesting is Hans Peter Martin (somewhere 12 to 16%), and the realistic chance of defending his realistic chance of remaining third strongest Austrian fraction. It remains to be seen how much mobilization the racist annotations of the FPÖ (between 14 to 18%) helped or damaged its course.

The Greens will lose (projected between 8 and 11%); how much depends to some extend if the Conservatives can mobilize their disappointed electorate. The BZÖ has a chance to enter the European Parliament, but 5.5% of the vote share is needed (currently ranked at somewhat 4 to 6%).

After five minutes of studying the candidate lists, I give up on a rational decision. I cannot make up my mind, so I close my eyes and put my finger at the ballot paper. As I open my eyes again, my finger rested on the Conservative circle on the ballot paper.

I specifically cast my vote for Otmar Karas in the hope he gains the pole position in his party. In my opinion, one of Austria’s competent and constructive voices in Europe – let’s hope I do not regret my decision later…

P.S.: For what it’s worth, here is my prediction for the Austrian part of the EP elections: SPÖ (Social Democrats) 27%, ÖVP (Conservatives) 26%, FPÖ 18%, HPM (Hans Peter Martin) 15%, Grüne (Greens) 6%, BZÖ 6%

Photo: Giles Merritt (center) speaking at the Public Opinion and Europe symposium. Photo Credit: Matthias Wurz

“Reporting on EU Affairs is boring, and it’s not the journalists’ fault,” exclaimed Giles Merritt, Editor of the Brussels-based bi-lingual journal Europe’s World and Secretary General of the think-tank Friends of Europe, and paused. And while the audience of academics, diplomats, politicians, the occasional journalist and those interested in European affairs caught their breath, he added, with a twinkle in his eyes, “I used to be a journalist reporting on European Affairs.”

Merritt’s provocative remarks were part of an international symposium on ‘Public Opinion and Europe’ held at the Diplomatic Academy on May 6 – 7. Co-organized by the Austrian-French Centre for Rapprochement in Europe and the French Institut Français des Relations Internationales, the conference was chaired by the Centre’s director and former Austrian Foreign Minister Peter Jankowitsch.

In six panel sessions, high-ranking diplomats, civil servants and academics from Austria and a number of EU member states, sought answers to questions on how the public views the European institutions and what could be done about Euro-skepticism. Speakers included French Senator Hubert Haenel, who chairs the senatorial committee on European Affairs; former Director General of Austrian National Bank Heinz Kienzl or Christian Leffler from Sweden, currently Head of Cabinet for EU Commissioner for Institutional Relations and Communications Strategy, Margot Wallström.

The conference concluded at the palatial French Embassy, prominently located at the picturesque Schwarzenbergplatz, in eyesight of the Memorial of the Soviet Army across the large square with its spectacular fountain. As the some 100 participants enjoyed the delicious cuisine française – charmingly hosted by His Eminence Ambassador Phillippe Carré – Giles Merritt, former Brussels correspondent for the Financial Times and regular contributor to the International Herald Tribune, offered and in-depth view on Europe over a glass of exquisite French red wine.

Not less, but more Euro-skepticism is needed, he already indicated in public. But how can one assure that openly voiced skepticism helps rather than combats the ideas of European Integration? “You can’t,” Merritt openly admitted, “but you won’t avoid it by not having a skeptical debate.” Otherwise, one is in danger of insulting the people’s intelligence.

The essence of Merritt’s argument lies within the answers the European Institutions – a-la-langue the European Commission as governing body – provides to its citizens. In Merritt’s view, the European Commission, particularly at the time of Jacques Delors as its President (from 1985 to 1995) once the greatest think tank in the world, today just balances the national interests of the member countries to formulate and negotiate a new consensus. The collective of “high-priests of the EU congratulating themselves,” has become something like an intellectual ivory tower with little idea of the concerns European citizens face.

But it is not a matter of lack of information – the website of the European Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/) is one of the most extensive ones with plenty of information in 23 European languages – but the information is not easy to digest. Although simple in its design, the documents provided are often legal texts or speech transcripts; and even the so-called ‘Easy Reading Corner’ provides free booklets on European Affairs, the viewpoint is that of the European Union, not the of its citizens. So maybe dummy-guides to Europe are needed?

Merritt smiled. “We laboured the idea for a long time that the EU has to improvise its communications,” Merritt recited and his disappointment swings in his voice; it was always an illusion to hope for that, as the European institutions did not see communication as a priority. As for reasons, the Brussels bureaucracy is made up primarily of lawyers – as any other national civil service – who know little about communication.

The communication failure on a European and national level about Europe also draws onto the current campaign for the upcoming elections for the European Parliament on June 7. Although for the first time, the European Parliament together with the European Commission and the member states run a unified campaign for active participation at the European parliamentary elections. What are Merritt’s predictions on the outcome?

“A shock,” he firmly stated and paused, and his serious look indicates the dramatic situation. The expectation is still of an extremely low turn-out and this requires, in Merritt’s words, a serious answer from the EU Commission, particularly of its President José Emanuel Barroso. “What is he going to say about the alarm bell of the European elections?” Merritt posed a rhetorical question. Europe’s fate depends on his answer.

This is a draft, the full article was published in June 2009 in The Vienna Review.

Photo: Andrew Ashwin as Owen Wingrave. Photo Credit: Christian Husar

“In peace I have found my image, I have found myself, “ Owen Wingrave, exclaimed in a powerful aria, sung by British baritone Andrew Ashwin; and at the climax of Benjamin Britten’s opera by the same name, the music for once leaves behind the darkness and overall oppressive atmosphere of the work.

A rare moment, as this sinister two-act opera, based on a short story of 1893 by American-born realist writer Henry James (1843 – 1916), tells of a young man’s struggle for his own way in life. 20-year-old Owen Wingrave, offspring of an old English military house, decided to abandon the tradition of a military career, seeking peace instead, also of his own pacifist mind.

Written at the time of the Vietnam War, Owen Wingrave was conceived as a grand television opera and televised by the BBC in 1971. The dreary work, adapted by librettist Myfanwy Piper, has found its way onto the operatic stage only gradually.

The Wiener Kammeroper, Vienna’s musical pioneer in less-known 20^th century opera, was host to such a performance. Premiered in Austria for the first time on May 23, director Nicola Raab put on a timeless, though stylish and highly effective, stage performance; the opera company’s pit orchestra was led by its Musical Director, German-born Daniel Hoyem-Cavazza. It all certainly had all the makings of a sensation.

As the audience enters to take their seat, the view on stage opens into a simple room with grey concrete-like walls and seemingly without doors or any interior. Owen Wingrave is sitting on the floor, above him hangs one of those concrete-like elements, with a spotlight from within focusing onto the singer below.

There is no clear reference to the setting of time in Anne-Marie Legenstein’s stage design – Britten originally had the late 19^th century England in mind.

The opening orchestral prelude, dominated by violent and shrill trumpet calls and percussive fanfares – marked in the score as marziale (French for martial) – foreshadows musically Owen Wingrave’s military pathway, envisioned by his family: To follow his father’s footsteps, a military officer who died in battle.

Having lost both his parents, Owen, was brought up by his aunt at the Paramore family estate, the strict and disciplined Miss Wingrave – elegantly dressed in a dark-green long dress, powerful and expressively sung by Polish Soprano Ewa Biegas, she clearly shows who is in charge.

The opening scene is set at Spencer Coyle’s residence – performed with a military air by baritone Craig Smith – a high-ranking military officer, in charge of the preparatory military training for Owen Wingrave and his friend Lechmere, a keen student of techniques of war, sung by Austrian Tenor Paul Schweinester.

As we witness Coyle’s teaching of military tactics – analyses of legendary Napoleonic battles – laid out by numerous grey war room figures of soldiers on the floor, Lechmere as well as an unnamed child, Tobias Margiol, to move the figures accordingly.

Owen, however, troubled by his own doubts about the sense and legitimacy of war, challenges Coyle in his mission.

The duet that follows between the two baritone voices – seemingly at first the overpowering conflict of the opera – posed also a musical challenge of writing two distinct parts in the same register.

Owen Wingrave is outspoken and passionate of his convictions and thus appears in higher registers; Coyle, on the other hand, holds the constraints of the British reserve, much more static and less variations in tone color. The moral conflict of war and peace between these two characters, however, is just a narrative diversion, as one realizes later, carefully crafted by the composer.

Coyle mistakes Owen Wingrave’s sentiment as rebellious behavior against him as a father-like figure and hopes the young man will come “to his senses.” Little was he prepared, however, for the fanatic upholding of a military tradition by Owen’s family – impersonated by Owen’s aunt, when she insists that “the Wingraves are soldiers, they go when they are called.”

The challenge of staging Owen Wingrave lies within its conception for television. The fast pace of character and plot development – the whole opera has about 110 minutes performance time in total – feels at times like watching a movie; the first act especially is a musical and emotional tour-de-force that turns the world at Paramore on its head, concluding at the family show-down with guests at the Wingrave dinner table in the end of Act I.

The stage is dark as all the characters, except Owen, enter through the doors at the back with decorative enlightened candle holders in their hands. There is not seating, so all the guests and members of the household; alongside Spencer Coyle came his wife – charmingly portrayed with carefully displayed sensitivity by Japanese-born Soprano Rika Shiratsuchi, the most lyrical of all characters.

Mrs. Julian, widow and dependant of the Wingrave household, was also present with her arrogant daughter Kate, pledged to Owen – the Austrian singers, Soprano Ingrid Habermann and Mezzo-soprano Astrid Hofer, well sung, seemed more like sisters

As all the characters line up, facing the audience, the head at the table to the left is taken by General Sir Philip Wingrave, grandfather of Owen; set for a tenor, the portrayal of British-born singer Brian Galliford appears rather youngish, though nevertheless ruthless and dominant, less through his presence but rather his stoic silence.

The sinister atmosphere at the dinner table, intensified by the flickering white candles, concludes in banning of Owen from the family, as he persists with even stronger conviction not to assume a military career.

The family members display such an unquestioned fanaticism on the matter – the threat of court-martial Owen is just one of those – much to the disgust of the Coyles, who feel deeply uncomfortable to be present, and show much more concern and understanding for him.

“All my life I have taught the art of war,” Spencer Coyle laments in the midst of all the arguing, “but for war in the family there is no answer in the books.” While none of the arguing makes any change on Owen – he kneels at the front of the stage, holding the boy who had huddled into the scene earlier, as to protect him of the shouting – the dinner is ended by Sir Philip Wingrave’s departure.

The second act that follows en suite after minor changes on the stage, encapsulates a more mystical element, which is instrumental in James’ Victorian ghost story text; that of a haunted room in the Wingrave house. No one has slept in that room ever since a disappointed ancestor, who had killed his own son, was found dead in that very same room before the funeral.

Combining both acts musically and dramatically posed a specific challenge, as stage director Nicola Raab admits, and “one catalyst is the young boy, a mirror image of Owen, who will appear more often (in our production) than in the original.”

For the same reason, the dramatically accurate though nevertheless risky decision was made to scrap the interval between the two acts; the dramatic flow was not interrupted, though, on the other hand, this requires the audience to constantly focus with little room to digest such a powerful stirring emotions portrayed on stage.

Act II also demonstrates the functional element of the stage design most effectively, as the grey concrete-like wall elements are moved on to the stage as bookshelves or closets; or marking a different location altogether, supported by the subtle light design of Michael Hofer, which explores the full spectrum of warm and cold colors, aggravated the desired effect within a scene.

Owen, after he found peace with himself, was spurred by Kate to prove his worthiness to her by staying the night in the haunted room alone. And as he encourages her to lock the door – standing at the center of the stage fully upright, bathed in blurry blue light – the concrete-grey element is slowly lowered and Owen – is fully absorbed. How will his trial of courage end? The composer’s conclusion is abundantly direct.

This is Britten at his most challenging, also for the fine-tuned ears. Alongside with his monumental War Requiem (1962), Owen Wingrave carries the pacifist message eternal peace. The Kammeroper certainly surpassed itself in this production as it demonstrates how valid Britten’s writing is today.

This is a draft, the full article will be published in June 2009 in The Vienna Review.

Photos: Finance Minister Josef Pröll (standing) delivering the budgetary speech, Apr. 21, 2009. Photo Credit: Matthias Wurz

The plenary chamber of the Austrian parliament was packed by 9:00 on Apr. 21, just like the stands for the general public in anticipation of ÖVP Finance Minister Josef Pröll’s 63-minute presentation of the budget.

At 9:05, Pröll rose from his seat to deliver what was expected to be his most important speech of his career so far, presenting the budgets for 2009 and 2010, which was broadcast live by ORF Austrian Television.

Austria, along with much of the world, is in the worst economic crisis in recent memory and the financial outlook is gloomy. The country’s national debt will increase by 3.5% in 2009 and 4.7% in 2010, well above the permitted Maastricht level of 3%. Consequently, the total national debt will reach an alarming 78.5% of Austria’s GDP by 2013, up from 62.5% in 2008. The bank rescue package (Vienna Review reported, April 2009) weighs with EUR 9.3 billion heavily (2009).

Economic Minister Reinhold Mitterlehner added in Der Standard of Apr. 25 that in order to consolidate the budget in the years to come “we also need new sources of income.” In other words, raise more taxes as the estimated tax income for the state drops by EUR 4.5 billion in 2010.

But Pröll in his budget speech seemed eager to rise to the occasion, perhaps hoping to imitate U.S. President Barack Obama’s rhetorical skills.

“In presenting this budget today, the hour of truth is upon us,” Pröll intoned. “And this budget is a clear declaration of war against the [economic] crisis.”

But Pröll is by no means an eloquent speaker. His delivery was uninspiring, so much as that only the members of his party are enthused to applause, and as journalists followed along the printed version of the speech, they noted some of the more amusing interjections of the opposition.

Most members of the majority Social Democrats (SPÖ) – Pröll’s senior coalition partner – listened with apparent apathy. After all, this was essentially a conservative-crafted budget intended to combat a serious financial and economic crisis, and left little room to reward their own electorate.

Just a week earlier, Princeton University economics professor and 2008 Nobel Prize Laureate Paul Krugman, who writes a bi-weekly column for the New York Times, gave rise to speculation on whether Europe’s fourth-richest country – in Pröll’s own definition of income per capita – might in fact be on the brink of bankruptcy.

Speaking at the Foreign Press Club in New York on Apr. 13, Krugman revived the debate on the impact of the financial crisis on Austrian banks, because of their strong engagement in Central and Eastern Europe (CEE) – see also my commentary of mid-April.

In the question period, Krugman was asked about Austrian banks’ high exposure to Eastern Europe. Austrian banks have more than U.S. $200 billion of exposure to Eastern Europe, roughly 70% of the Austrian GDP – not including Bank Austria (UniCredit) and Hypo Alpe Adria (Hypo Group) that are foreign-owned. Was there a chance this might lead the country into bankruptcy? Krugman responded pointedly:

“Now it’s a tiny one, it’s Iceland but that just shows that it can happen, even to advanced countries. Ireland looks pretty bad because of large financial exposure. And Austria would probably be my third candidate in those leads.”

His provocative remarks sparked high-profile responses and anger in Austria.

“Absolutely absurd,” Pröll responded on Austrian Television on Apr. 15. There was no need for “unqualified statements based on inadequate information, which can put a country under massive pressure if they are uttered carelessly.”

Besides, Austria’s high lending exposures in the CEE area has to be set against savings, Pröll clarified, with deposits of some 85% of the EUR 200 billion owed.

The head of the Austrian Chamber of Commerce, Christoph Leitl, was right behind him. In Der Standard, the same day, Leitl stressed that Austria’s AAA rating was in no danger, which several rating agencies recently confirmed, but emphasized that “erroneous’ statements could lead to higher risk premiums on Austrian bonds. That really damages Austria.”

“It seems that I have reached the stage where I create a stir by saying the obvious,” Krugman responded in his blog two days later; and over 100 comments followed within a few hours.

Krugman’s statement has revived a debate of the past months when media reports, such as the Austrian news magazine profil, asked in mid-February: ‘Is Austria going bankrupt?’

But in Vienna, at least, the tangible evidence just doesn’t seem to be there.

“It is a palpable presence in people’s everyday lives [in Central and Eastern Europe], as it is in America,” said Robert Graffam of Darby Investments, a private equity firm in Vienna that specializes in CEE. “In Austria, somehow, you don’t feel that.”

Indeed, the severe financial troubles of Austria’s neighbors highlight the huge investment Austrian banks had made since the 1990s in the CEE countries. They are the most exposed in the area, led by Raiffeisen with 54% of its risk-weighted assets, and Erste Bank Group with 38%.

Evidently Finance Minister Josef Pröll set off for a ‘face-saving’ trip to Bulgaria, Romania, Croatia and the Ukraine in mid-February promoting the Austrian government’s proposal for a financial stability pact for the CEE countries.

However, Pröll’s goodwill tour sparked fresh concerns in the Austrian financial sector.  On Feb. 17, the Romanian business online magazine, the Wall-Street was headlined ‘Romania Could Drive Austria to a Meltdown.’

At the same time, a report by Der Standard back home estimated that even a 10% default of CEE loans could lead to a collapse of the Austrian financial sector. The figures of the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD) confirmed estimates of at least 10% bail-out of bad loans.

Not surprisingly, the government’s rescue plan failed to convince the other EU member-states, as it seemed to be motivated only by Austrian self-interest.

Thus, while Krugman’s comment may be exaggerated, as bankruptcy seems unlikely in Austria at this stage, he still made a valuable point: Austria should not underestimate the effect a widespread financial collapse of financial institutions inevitably has when the CEE countries are not stabilized

If this aspect of the financial crisis is mishandled, predicted The Daily Telegraph columnist Ambrose Evans-Pritchard on Feb. 15, it could mean “a debacle [that is] big enough to shatter the fragile banking systems of Western Europe and set off round two of our financial Götterdämmerung.”

Austria would then certainly play the leading role.

This is an excerpt, the full article was published in May 2009 in The Vienna Review.

Photo: from left to right, (Former) NATO General Secretary Jaap de Hoop Scheffer, U.S. President Barack Obama, French President Nicholas Sarkozy and Germany’s Chancellor Angela Merkel at the NATO Summit 2009. Photo Credit: Getty Images

The North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), found cause to celebrate this year: On Apr. 4, 1949, the collective defense alliance was founded in Brussels on the eve of the Cold War. Sixty years later and now with 28 member states – Croatia and Albania were formally accepted this year – the organization set out to redefine its role after the collapse of communism 20 years ago.

For the first time, the annual NATO Summit was jointly hosted by two member states, France and Germany, whose “close partnership during the course of NATO’s history symbolizes a vision of a Europe whole and free,” according to the NATO website. Following the Summit, member countries’ leaders called for a new doctrine, as the previous one of 1999 neither reflects the changes in Russia nor takes global terrorism – like the 9/11 – into account.

The 60th anniversary also marked the return of France to the allied command structure – a move hailed by members, though deeply controversial within France. French President Nicholas Sarkozy defended his decision by saying that now was time for change:
“Our strategy cannot remain stuck in the past,” he urged at a talk at France’s Strategic Research Foundation in mid-March, “when the conditions of our security have changed radically.” France, Sarkozy argued, will have more influence in NATO missions while the independence of the nuclear-equipped French military will remain untouched.

But all seems well without NATO for Austria, now surrounded by alliance members, except Liechtenstein and Switzerland. The dramatic NATO membership plea by news magazine profil journalists Gernot Bauer and Georg Hoffmann-Ostenhof in the article ‘Holt uns da rein!’ (‘Get us in there!’ Apr. 6 edition) did not, however, spark any further political debate. All political parties seem happy to remain neutral, including those who once argued for NATO membership.

Austria’s neutrality remains technical, however, as it joined NATO Partnership for Peace in February 1995, and has deployed troops to the NATO-led peacekeeping force in Bosnia and Herzegovina (1996) and Kosovo (1999).

So wouldn’t it be beneficial for Austria to engage in a more fundamental debate on the issue? After all, the adaptation of the European Security and Defence Policy (ESDP) of December 2003 was initially NATO’s European Security and Defence Identity. Although under jurisdiction of the EU, this development points in the direction that a strategic European security policy could develop.

When Austria joined the European Union in 1995, it chose to participate in all aspects of the European integration process, including the Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP), of which the ESDP is a key element.

Journalist Peter Michael Lingens, a current commentator for profil and strong supporter of Austria’s NATO membership, however, remained pessimistic concerning Austria’s course.

“I see no chance that Austria will join NATO. The (Austrian) population was always against it and still clings on to its utterly pointless neutrality.”
Lingens is also author of the book Wehrloses Österreich? Neutralität oder NATO – Alternativen in der Sicherheitspolitik (2000), in which he anticipates that the far-right government under Wolfgang Schüssel’s chancellorship (2000 – 2006) would take active steps for Austria’s accession to NATO.

Indeed, Austria adopted a new Security and Defence Doctrine in December 2001 that explicitly states a regular review of NATO membership. It also stresses active support and involvement in the European Union’s security considerations that envisioned a common European defense structure and would allow Austria to be militarily involved in the framework of crisis management and peace-making operations. Austria seemed on track to NATO accession.

However, the political situation in Austria afterwards developed quite differently: The FPÖ – after the split with the BZÖ and HC Strache assuming leadership in 2005 – performed a U-turn from its traditional pro-NATO position and demanded to uphold Austria’s neutrality. In addition, the Social Democrats have – while in opposition – dug themselves into defending Austria’s neutral status – a position they have maintained since.

“The SPÖ will by no means think about changing their role,” Lingens analyzed. “The Social democrats are seen by the people as more NATO-critical and nearer to neutrality, unlike the ÖVP; and under no circumstances will the SPÖ sacrifice this advance in public opinion.”
Besides, since taking charge of the Defense Ministry by the SPÖ in 2007, the Defense Budget has dropped to an all-time low of 0.82% of GDP in 2008, one of the lowest across the board, which even threatens existing UN peacekeeping missions like Chad, and are certainly too little to maintain NATO military standards.

Of course, Austria does well being neutral, Lingens added with a sarcastic tone: The country “is able to reduce its defense expenditure to a minimum, and will not get into the situation of being asked by Obama for more troops for Afghanistan.”

However, there are plenty of security issues that are of concern to Europe, not least the relations to Russia, China or Iran, though none of them, according to Lingens, poses a powerful military threat to NATO.

Rather “peace-securing and -maintaining military activities, but also securing energy resources like oil or the defense against human catastrophes” will be the issues for NATO to combat. And of course, “the non-proliferation of nuclear weapons might occasionally require military pressure.”

However, Russia is evidently a special case, and “NATO must be in the position of putting Russia in its place,” simply because it is unclear whether the country might step back into totalitarian rule. However, Lingens believes that Russia perceives neither NATO Eastern accession – such as that of the Baltic States in 2004 – nor the proposed missile defense shield with facilities in the Czech Republic and Poland, as a serious threat.

“Putin and Medvedev use these arguments only for domestic political reasons,” Lingens said. An example of this is the widely discussed announcement of Russian President Dmitri Medvedev on Mar. 17 that a further expansion of NATO requires Russia to modernize its nuclear arsenal: “For the same reason one should not make a further NATO accession dependable on Russia, but rather show them that we are on their side by Western investments in the economy.” Nevertheless, he added, it is important to demonstrate to the Russian side that there are no spheres of influence like in Communist times.

Whatever the strategic implications, a review of the NATO option for Austria, or at least a public debate, would be desirable. Austrian politicians might reach the same conclusion as former French Foreign Minister Hubert Védrine, who fiercely argued against his country’s rejoining NATO. In a television interview with France Info on Apr. 6, he called the alliance “passé,” and a relict of the Cold War, and questioned “why we need a system that was very integrated in order to live through the Soviet threat?”

Nevertheless, as the NATO member states seek to redefine the alliance’s doctrine, supported by the new U.S. Administration of President Barack Obama, NATO might yet outlive its critics.

In the opening chapter of his book Wehrloses Österreich? Lingens tells of a joke he used about 10 years ago, that Austria might become the first neutral member of NATO. It is an option for NATO, but is it also one for Austria?

This is an excerpt, the full article was published in May 2009 in The Vienna Review.