415
“Neutrality Won’t Save Us”: Austria Reconsiders NATO Membership Amid Rising Russian Threat
(united24media.com)
this post was submitted on 28 Jul 2025
415 points (98.4% liked)
Europe
6858 readers
839 users here now
News and information from Europe 🇪🇺
(Current banner: La Mancha, Spain. Feel free to post submissions for banner images.)
Rules (2024-08-30)
- This is an English-language community. Comments should be in English. Posts can link to non-English news sources when providing a full-text translation in the post description. Automated translations are fine, as long as they don't overly distort the content.
- No links to misinformation or commercial advertising. When you post outdated/historic articles, add the year of publication to the post title. Infographics must include a source and a year of creation; if possible, also provide a link to the source.
- Be kind to each other, and argue in good faith. Don't post direct insults nor disrespectful and condescending comments. Don't troll nor incite hatred. Don't look for novel argumentation strategies at Wikipedia's List of fallacies.
- No bigotry, sexism, racism, antisemitism, islamophobia, dehumanization of minorities, or glorification of National Socialism. We follow German law; don't question the statehood of Israel.
- Be the signal, not the noise: Strive to post insightful comments. Add "/s" when you're being sarcastic (and don't use it to break rule no. 3).
- If you link to paywalled information, please provide also a link to a freely available archived version. Alternatively, try to find a different source.
- Light-hearted content, memes, and posts about your European everyday belong in other communities.
- Don't evade bans. If we notice ban evasion, that will result in a permanent ban for all the accounts we can associate with you.
- No posts linking to speculative reporting about ongoing events with unclear backgrounds. Please wait at least 12 hours. (E.g., do not post breathless reporting on an ongoing terror attack.)
- Always provide context with posts: Don't post uncontextualized images or videos, and don't start discussions without giving some context first.
(This list may get expanded as necessary.)
Posts that link to the following sources will be removed
- on any topic: Al Mayadeen, brusselssignal:eu, citjourno:com, europesays:com, Breitbart, Daily Caller, Fox, GB News, geo-trends:eu, news-pravda:com, OAN, RT, sociable:co, any AI slop sites (when in doubt please look for a credible imprint/about page), change:org (for privacy reasons)
- on Middle-East topics: Al Jazeera
- on Hungary: Euronews
Unless they're the only sources, please also avoid The Sun, Daily Mail, any "thinktank" type organization, and non-Lemmy social media. Don't link to Twitter directly, instead use xcancel.com. For Reddit, use old:reddit:com
(Lists may get expanded as necessary.)
Ban lengths, etc.
We will use some leeway to decide whether to remove a comment.
If need be, there are also bans: 3 days for lighter offenses, 7 or 14 days for bigger offenses, and permanent bans for people who don't show any willingness to participate productively. If we think the ban reason is obvious, we may not specifically write to you.
If you want to protest a removal or ban, feel free to write privately to the primary mod account @EuroMod@feddit.org
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
If you look through the lense of hybrid warfare, it's comparatively small, even for 'here'.
To despise the war itself logically you have to despise other wars and violence in equal proportions, even, or especially if they don't happen here.
I can't tell if you do. The limiting of the scope to here makes me think that you are aware of a broader context that would lead you to a different judgement that you want to avoid.
You try to tell me that the war Russia is waging, which forced them to switch to war economy, which forced them to mobilise, which forced them to recruit foreign fighters and weapons from countries such as North Korea or Iran, which has them deploy several hundred thousand soldiers and which has them experienced a six-figure sum of losses, is "comparatively small"?
Do you really?
With a generous definition of hybrid warfare, yes.
Thanks for this honesty. You choose to be generous towards Russia that currently is busy destroying it's neighbouring country by military force, yet seem to be very upset about Austria wanting to discuss a possible future within NATO. How unmasking! :D
You can't be that oblivious that you interpret it like that.
You take more offense in Austria considering NATO than in Russia waging war.
I take no direct offence. Both are about politics in which I am not directly involved.
The offence is that the media in general uses the Russian aggression to justify the reduction of civil rights. In this case there is no direct benefit so that the empty argument becomes visible.
You find excuses/explanations for Russia's actions (war) but don't accept excuses/explanations for Austria's actions (NATO). Strange, isn't it?
Which is neither case nor topic here.
I gave you a clear example for a benefit, hence this point is invalid.
No, because they are on different sides of the conflict. If Nato commits crimes, Germany will be responsible, like we are after WW2. So I have to be dilligent.
For Russia, I have to find their motivation because the propaganda I receive paints them as irrational monsters. They are still the enemy, but dehumanising them supposedly was a mistake, so I look for their rational motives.
Then better don't go back to my initial comment. The entire point is the wrong justification.
Nothing substantial. Ukraine is not part of Nato and already receives the information.
Somehow, I have the feeling you don't see it as clear when it comes to Russia's crimes.
How does finding any "motivation" change your view on them waging a war of aggression? What is there to explain? What to excuse? Does it somehow alleviate them from their responsibility for their crimes?
Also, I have very strong doubts that the propaganda you receive paints Russia as the monsters.
You said: "The offence is that the media in general uses the Russian aggression to justify the reduction of civil rights." This is neither topic of this article nor of your initial comment. Stop moving the goalposts.
Your personal assessment is irrelevant to the actual substantiality.
Ukraine is receiving this data, because it is actively attacked and we won't just stand there and let that happen. Also, given the circumstances, Ukraine is as embedded into NATO as possible and would love to be in NATO any minute. But I guess you're of course strongly opposed to this as well.
Nobody will blaim me for Russian crimes. I evaluate the countries for different roles.
No
The usual stuff does.
Where do you think all of this ends?
Besides that arguments should be convincing. But you kind of agree:
Guess what, the same will happen with Austria.
Will you blame Russia for its crimes?
And yours? Is your view on NATO or Russia shaped by propaganda?
You stated out of the blue that NATO must be pressuring Austria. No proof, no connection to the article. I consider this a try to derail and to spin.
You offer no arguments. You're being disproven and your only answer is "yea, but still no". So it's irrelevant.
I very much hope the same won't happen to Austria. As it is only happening to Ukraine because we desperately try to save it from Russian destruction despite all the indescribable harm it is suffering since 2022. No country wants this to happen to them, no country will take the risk. This is why Austria wants this discussion. It is beyond me how anyone cannot understand this, although I'm coming to the conclusion that this is less a "can" problem but more a "want" problem.
Yes, from you. I am not saying that Austria will be attacked by Russia, even though I kind of say it. This feels like an argument with AI.
Don't try to make your argument mine. It is only you that tries to narrow this on an attack on Austria in order to disprove the necessity of an Austrian membership. I told you what the actual security gains for Austria can be in NATO and those are irrespective of a Russian attack on Austria. So are we finally done with this idea?
And btw, still curious:
Will you blame Russia for its crimes?
No. Where is the gain if Ukraine also has it?
There is no other threat for Austria.
They are guilty of their crimes. If I blame them don't I imply that somebody else is guilty but I put the blame on Russia?
Ukraine is in the middle of a war. Austria wants these gains before Russia sends hundreds of thousands of troops across the border and massacres villages and bombs cities. Is that really so hard to understand?
I don't oppose that Russia is a threat to Austria. I oppose that the benefit of an Austrian NATO membership comes only in effect in case of a Russian attack on Austria. And I explained to you why.
What's hard for me to understand is that you don't understand that Austria would be fighting that war in Poland and Slovacia.
Again: this isn't about Austria fighting a war. Can you understand that?
It is about gaining security benefits before a war breaks out.
No, I don't understand. The security benefits are for that one specific war. It's the same.
The security benefits come into effect without/before Russia actually attacking.
So does the war before attacking Austria.
It's essentially the same.
It is not. The benefits come into effect even before the war itself.
That doesn't matter strategically.
Why wouldn't it?