An article by Floris Cooijmans - MI International
Since the Russian invasion of Ukraine, many countries in Europe have been rethinking their security strategies and defence policies. Examples of this trend include Germany’s historic increase in military spending, Denmark’s referendum on its EU security opt-out, and Sweden and Finland deciding to join NATO, after decades of commitment to military neutrality.
With the two Nordic countries joining NATO, only four countries in the EU remain outside of this military alliance: Austria, Cyprus, Ireland and Malta. Where did their neutrality policies come from, and, like Finland and Sweden, are they likely to change?
Austria
Out of the four, Austria is closest to the front of the war; the capital Vienna is closer to the Ukrainian border than it is to their alpine neighbour Switzerland.
Like Germany, Austria was occupied by the Allies after the end of World War II. Unlike Germany, however, Austria was not partitioned. The Western Allies and the Soviet Union agreed to leave Austria intact as long as the country promised to remain strictly neutral during the Cold War. The country did, as neutrality has been anchored in the Austrian Constitution since then. Even though this neutrality was imposed from outside, it has become the central tenet of Austria’s security policy.
This neutrality gave Austria credibility as unbiased actor when it came to, for instance, peace talks for Syria. A number of large international organisations like the OSCE and OPEC are situated in Vienna, on ‘neutral ground’. Austria prides itself on being the bridge between east and west. But where does that leave them when the geopolitical climate changes, and both sides are looking to burn bridges, not build them? This is the situation Austria now finds itself in. The Austrian government suggested Vienna as a meeting point to conduct peace negotiations between Russia and Ukraine, though the offer was declined, suggesting that maybe Austria has already lost some of its neutral prestige.
Even as the war rages on, there has been no significant movement to change the policy of neutrality by joining NATO. Opinion polling since the outbreak of the war showed that 75% of Austrians want to remain neutral and opposejoining the military alliance.
Cyprus
This Mediterranean island state is not in NATO, but for different reasons than the other states discussed. It is mainly due to its strained relationship with Turkey. Without rehearsing the lengthy history of the Turkey-Cyprus relationship, the key fact is that Turkey does not recognise the state of Cyprus. This means that in applying for NATO membership, Cyprus would most likely face a Turkish veto. Turkey has been a NATO member since 1952, when the country was seen as a highly strategic asset because of its position between the Mediterranean and Black Sea. For a country to join NATO, it must be given unanimous consent from existing members and Turkey has already shown they are not hesitant to use this veto power - as Sweden’s rocky accession process into NATO has shown.
A NATO member state not acknowledging Cyprus’ existence also means they cannot join NATO’s ‘’Partnership for Peace’’ Programme, an informal trust-building programme which all other neutral states discussed here, and even Russia, are participants in.
It should also be mentioned that on the island of Cyprus there are two foreign military stations. The enclaves of Akrotiri and Dhekelia are officially British Overseas Territories, and host British military bases and installations. This land was retained by Britain after Cyprus won its independence from British rule in 1960. This means that NATO troops are present on the island, without the island itself being part of the Alliance.
Because the Turkish-Cyprus conflict is unlikely to be resolved in the near future, the chances of Cyprus joining NATO are slim.
Ireland
After a bloody war for independence against the United Kingdom, and a subsequent civil war which lasted till the 1990’s, the Irish appetite for armed conflict was low. They stayed neutral during World War II, as the country had just won its independence and did not want to get dragged into another conflict.
Similarly, when NATO was founded, the Irish were not keen on joining the military alliance as its former coloniser, the UK was a prominent member.
According to Irish law, whether to join NATO would have to be decided via a national referendum. A poll conducted just after the outbreak showed that less than a quarter of the Irish population was in favour of changing Ireland’s neutrality, but a more recent poll suggested that now a majority of the Irish (52%) are in favour of joining NATO. Such major swings in opinion polls always have to be taken with a grain of salt, but they nevertheless suggest that the Irish population is split on the issue, which might evolve into an active public debate.
Malta
That this group of Mediterranean islands became neutral was mostly due to the efforts of one man: Prime Minister Dom Mintoff. After Malta gained independence from the United Kingdom, Mintoff tried to negotiate a defence agreement with the British, who still had military bases on the island. These negotiations failed, which resulted in Mintoff wanting to get rid of any British military presence on the island. In the end he was successful, with the last British troops leaving the island in 1979. As part of this agreement, Mintoff had to guarantee that no Warsaw-pact country was allowed to establish a military base on the island.
During his time as Prime Minister, Mintoff made Malta part of the non-aligned movement, the group of countries who did not pick a side during the Cold War. He tried to establishfruitful relations with countries on all three sides, such as the UK and France on the western side, China and Poland on the eastern side and Libya and Algeria on the non-aligned side. Through his approach he managed to keep Malta out of conflict and helped strengthen the Maltese economy.
Even though Mintoff’s time as PM was limited, his neutrality policy has been adopted by all major Maltese political parties since his terms and was codified into the constitution in the late eighties, after Mintoff had left office. It remains a popular policy to this day, with opinion polls showing two-thirds of the population in favour of remaining neutral.
Conclusion
Since Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, the only two EU members that did change their neutrality policy saw a massive swing in popular opinion, which their respective governments had to give heed to. Malta, Ireland and Cyprus are all islands on the periphery of Europe, and Austria is surrounded by EU and NATO member states. These countries have the geographical privilege of not being close to the aggressor in Europe’s latest war. This has probably played a role in why public opinion in this place has remained predominantly in favour of remainingneutral, giving their governments little reason to change their policy.
Lastly, if the neutrality of these states were to be violated, they would not be alone, even if they are not formally part of a military alliance. Like NATO’s famous collective defence clause, Article 5, there is a similar feature in EU law, namely article 42 (7) of the TEU which states:
"If a Member State is the victim of armed aggression on its territory, the other Member States shall have towards it an obligation of aid and assistance by all the means in their power."
Even though "by all the means in their power" can be interpreted in different ways, it is clear that when attacked, even the EU’s four neutrals, would not have to face this violation of their neutrality alone.
Sources:
https://foreignpolicy.com/2022/07/12/austria-neutrality-nato-ukraine-russia-security-strategy/
Cover Image: https://unsplash.com/photos/-g...
Condividi il post
L'Autore
Redazione
Categorie
Tag
#europe #austria #cyprus #ireland #malta #neutrality #NATO #russia #ukraine