Western liberals need to learn from Austria’s far-right turn. far right

The far-right Freedom Party (FPÖ), founded in the 1950s by a man who was a senior officer in Hitler’s elite paramilitary SS, is on the verge of taking power in Austria.

On January 6, the country’s President Alexander Van der Bellen reluctantly replaced FPÖ leader Herbert Kickl—who, like Hitler, was once referred to by his party as the “People’s Chancellor”—to form a coalition government after a centrist bid. Gave the mandate to make. Assembling one without FPO collapsed unexpectedly.

The FPÖ, which came in first place in the September election with 29 percent of the vote, is now in talks to form a coalition with the centre-right Austrian People’s Party (ÖVP).

Apart from the FPÖ, this was not a preferred outcome for any Austrian faction. Like all other major parties, the ÖVP had entered the election on a promise to never form a coalition government with a party with Nazi roots. Yet when it became clear that a non-FPÖ alternative could not be agreed upon, the ÖVP rapidly changed its leader to back out of this promise and participate in coalition talks.

The anticipated FPÖ-OVP coalition would not be the first in Austria’s recent history to include a far-right party. In fact, the FPÖ was the junior partner in the ÖVP-led coalition government as recently as 2019. But it will be the first time that the FPO is the senior partner in the Austrian government, and thus the main decision maker.

Political developments in Austria – a European country with a population of only nine million – rarely cause much of a stir on the international scene. Nevertheless, the potential rise to power of a proud far-right party in Hitler’s home country deserves special attention. Especially at a time when the radical right is making gains around the world, and Russia continues its war of aggression in the center of Europe, the success of the FPÖ in Austria deserves close analysis. We must look to the situation in Austria to understand the failures of Western liberalism that have led us here, and use this knowledge to come up with a strategy to prevent further gains by intolerant forces .

First and foremost, it needs to be recognized that an FPGO government in Austria would be a significant victory for Russia.

When the FPÖ first came into government with the ÖVP in 2017, it had a “‘friendship agreement'” with Vladimir Putin’s United Russia party. As interior minister, its current leader, Herbert Kickl, has used his powers to reform the country. ordered a raid on Germany’s own domestic intelligence service, causing European security services to intercept its Austrian counterpart.

Kickl’s attack on Austrian intelligence followed some of Europe’s most significant spy scandals, underscoring how the new Austrian government paved the way for Russia to deepen its infiltration and influence in European politics. In 2019, then ÖVP leader and Vice-Chancellor Heinz-Christian Strache was videotaped accepting a bribe from an alleged Russian oligarch, leading to the fall of the government. That government also signed Europe’s longest agreement with Kremlin-owned energy giant Gazprom. The gas offtake deal, which runs until 2040, is now at the heart of legal disputes surrounding the end of Russia’s gas deliveries to central Europe via Ukraine in 2024.

The FPÖ has avoided engaging in the same level of explicitly pro-Putin politics since the beginning of Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine, but ties between the far-right party and the Kremlin still run deep. Karin Kneisel, the FPÖ’s foreign minister between 2017 and 2019, who infamously danced with Vladimir Putin at his wedding, now works at a Kremlin-affiliated think tank in Russia. The party has also called for the resumption of Russian gas trade. Although there is no easy way to do this due to Kiev’s refusal to renew the transfers, once in government, the FPÖ will likely join with the Slovak and Hungarian governments to pressure the Ukrainians to try to force their way .

Austria is home to one of the largest natural gas storage centers in Europe. Baumgarten has historically been a major distribution point for westbound Russian gas, but it also serves Norwegian and other northern imports. As Eastern Europe will need more supplies from outside Russia in the near future, this strategic hub coming under the control of a Putin-friendly government is a significant risk to the continent’s gas markets.

The EU is undoubtedly aware of the danger, but appears unable to do much to stop the rise of FPOs. Once centrist talks failed, and the FPÖ entered negotiations with the ÖVP to form a government, European officials began making serious noises about potentially sanctioning Austria – which had been in recession for two years. Is in – National deficit less than three percent for not being in line with its requirements (this issue was ignored when other parties were negotiating, despite the lack of consensus among them on the solution to this problem). However, the FPÖ quickly responded to the threat of triggering the EU’s excessive deficit process and announced an agreement with the ÖVP to cut spending by 6.3 billion euros ($6.6 billion). Brussels immediately agreed that it would meet the bloc’s deficit requirements.

On the other hand, the EU is completely silent on whether an FPÖ-led government would align with the bloc’s values, despite the FPÖ manifesto calling for Austrian “homogeneity” to be achieved through “re-migration”. This is in sharp contrast to the EU’s reaction to the entry of the FPO as a junior coalition partner for the first time in the Austrian government in 2000. At the time, Brussels threatened to impose sanctions. It later formalized a process to hold member states to account when they violate EU principles or citizens’ rights in response to the FPO threat. However, this process has never been used and it appears that it never will be.

With the EU seemingly unable and unwilling to do more to change Austria’s political trajectory, an FPÖ-led government in the country appears to be an inevitability. As is the case elsewhere in Europe, and even in the United States, the rise of the far right in Austria is not entirely of its own accord, but is a direct result of liberal, centrist failures.

The ÖVP – supposedly a centre-right party – has found itself playing second fiddle to a pro-Putin, far-right party, not least because the FPÖ’s extreme positions are wholeheartedly supported by large sections of the population , but because it has failed to gain trust. Of voters. The Ibiza affair and several other corruption investigations that followed turned large sections of its support base against the party. Due to scandals over handing out lucrative appointments, contracts and gambling licenses to political supporters, it failed to overcome the perception that it was a party of corrupt elites.

Meanwhile, Austria’s centre-left Social Democratic Party (SPD) is equally tainted, with its last chancellor, Christian Kern, also under investigation over his business dealings. Finishing third last September with 21 percent of the vote was its worst performance ever.

With the two main centrist parties in the country unable to convince voters that they could leave cronyism and corruption behind, the FPÖ filled the void, portraying itself as the radical opposition to the ruling establishment. Of course, this is nothing like the scandal of its own, including its rebirth under charismatic firebrand Jörg Haider in the late 1990s. But by sharply breaking with its tainted leaders and running on an increasingly popular platform of Euroscepticism, autonomy and social conservatism, it managed to finish the last election in first place. The party even managed to recast its effort for a discriminatory and racist policy such as “re-immigration” as support for “a social state for true Austrians who deserve it”, thereby discrediting itself. Positioned as a mainstream populist force against “corrupt” liberal parties.

Far-right forces began their rise elsewhere in Europe, under similar circumstances, fueled by years if not decades of perceived liberal failures and corruption. For example, Germany’s Alternative for Deutschland (AfD), which also supports “re-migration” policies, is expected to come in second place in Germany’s February election.

European liberalism is in crisis – in Austria, in Germany and beyond. And far-right forces rising to power across the continent are threatening European gas markets, Ukraine’s future as it continues to fight Russia’s aggression, and the values ​​and principles for which it stands. Europe was once united.

In such a situation, liberalism in Europe is in dire need of a new message. At this moment of crisis, we might perhaps turn to Austrian economist Leopold Kohr’s essay “Disunion Now” for inspiration. Published in 1941 when the cost of failure to unite against the far right at the ballot box in Austria and Germany was reaching its frightening peak, Kohr’s essay offers a template for a possible response today.

Kohr saw any potential “Europe of Nations” as doomed to failure unless it was based on small autonomous entities such as city-states. Kohr posited that the desire for “uniformity” enabled political solidarity. While he warned about the potential for this to give rise to significant controversies, reminding readers that “the Duke of Tyrol declared war on the Margrave of Bavaria for stealing a horse”, he argued that the small state’s Nature would keep the costs aside, writing that “the adjacent Duchy of Liechtenstein and the Archbishopric of Hamburg never knew that the war had taken place”. Kohr’s vision was not based on creating a “United States of Europe” but on adopting Switzerland’s model of cantonal sovereignty, which he argued would lay the basis for a more stable federal Europe.

Kohr’s approach is one that European liberals must adopt. As the rise of the FPÖ proves, they have already given up on using the federal powers granted to Brussels to oppose far-right governments. But because they offer no alternative to populist right-wing narratives, liberalism is destined to continue losing at the ballot box. Developing the Coherian alternative is the only appropriate response to popular demands for greater sovereignty and desire for local solidarity, and this in turn will lay the basis for a more stable and thus effective Europe.

The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial stance of Al Jazeera.