Abstract
Neutrality is linked to the concept of sovereignty. At its beginning, this concept entailed the right of nation states to go to war whenever this seemed appropriate to them, depending on their national interests. Neutrality represents the complementary right of states not to take part in such wars. Thus neutrality is an expression of national sovereignty.1 It is mainly a political concept. The legal rules, which developed over time, reflected consolidated international political practice. Neutrality was never meant as an end in itself but always as a policy instrument, aimed at restricting and regulating use of military force in international relations. Neutrality doesn’t preclude a country from taking part in international cooperation with the aim of limiting or preventing international conflicts, as do collective security arrangements. On the contrary: such arrangements actually pursue the same purpose as neutrality.2
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Daniel Frei (1968): Neutralität — Ideal oder Kalkül? Zweihundert Jahre aussen-politisches Denken in der Schweiz, Frauenfeld/Stuttgart (Huber), pp. 14–15.
Andrew Bennet and Joseph Lepgold (1991:108): Reinventing Collective Security after the Cold War and Gulf Conflict, in: Political Science Quarterly, pp. 213–215; Frei (1968), pp. 176, 178 (see note no. 1).
Heinz Vetschera (1990): Austria, in: Richard E. Bissell and Curt Gasteyger (eds.): The Missing Link. West European Neutrals and Regional Security, Durham/London (Duke University Press), p. 59.
Vetschera (1990), p. 60 (see note no. 3).
Report of the Federal Government to the National Council and to the Federal Council concerning the Future Relations of Austria with the European Communities, Vienna, 1989.
Commission Opinion on Austria’s Application for Membership (SEC (91) 1590 final), in: Bulletin of the European Communities (supplement 4) (1992), p. 6.
Paul Luif (1995): On the Road to Brussels. The Political Dimension of Austria’s, Finland’s and Sweden’s Accession to the European Union, Vienna (Braumüller), p. 198.
Commission opinion on Austria’s application, p. 17 (see note no. 6).
Luif (1995), p. 240 (see note no. 7); Thomas Nowotny (1991): Das Avis der EG-Kommission zum österreichischen Beitrittsansuchen, in: Österreichisches Jahrbuch für Politik, p. 264.
Bericht des Aussenpolitischen Ausschusses des Nationalrates, Stenographisches Protokoll, 20.10.1992, p. 3, cited in: Luif (1995), p. 244 (see note no. 7).
Vetschera (1990), p. 76 (see note no. 3).
Otmar Höll and Helmut Kramer (27 February — 3 March 1997): Globalization, Normalization and Europeanization of a Small(er) State’s Foreign Policy. The Case of Austria (Paper prepared for the 25th ECPR Joint Session of Workshops), Berne, p. 17.
Vetschera (1990), p. 77 (see note no. 3).
Paul Luif (1998): Der Wandel der österreichischen Neutralität. Ist österreich ein sicherheitspolitischer Trittbrettfahrer? (öIIP Arbeitspapier 18), Laxenburg, pp. 30–31.
Luif (1998), p. 44 (see note no. 14).
Laurent Goetschel (1998): Die GASP nach der Regierungskonferenz 96’. Auf dem Weg zum europäischen Krisenmanagement?, in: Friedensbericht 1998 (österreichisches Studienzentrum für Frieden und Konfliktlösung / Schweizerische Friedensstiftung (ed.)), Chur/Zurich (Rüegger), pp. 63–78.
Neue ZĂĽrcher Zeitung, 2 April 1998, p. 1.
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1998 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Rendl, A. (1998). Neutrality and the EU: An Austrian View. In: Goetschel, L. (eds) Small States Inside and Outside the European Union. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4757-2832-3_12
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4757-2832-3_12
Publisher Name: Springer, Boston, MA
Print ISBN: 978-1-4419-5060-4
Online ISBN: 978-1-4757-2832-3
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive