Kriegsszenario in Österreich: „Neutralität wird uns mehr schaden als nützen“
https://www.profil.at/ausland/kriegssze ... /403163423
Würde Russland Österreich angreifen, Franz-Stefan Gady?
https://www.diepresse.com/26298569/wuer ... tefan-gady
https://bsky.app/profile/siobhangeets.b ... sxsxhmas27
Stocker auf Stippvisite
17 Millionen: Steirisches Unternehmen baut Panzerungen für Europas Rüstungsindustrie
https://www.kleinezeitung.at/artikel/26 ... er-europas
How the EU quietly backed away from talking up its mutual defence clause
https://www.ft.com/content/bf66ad50-300 ... 25a6b1a6=1EU and whose army?
A roar of debate over expanding the EU’s mutual defence clause has been quietly smothered by national capitals and senior officials, as the bloc’s incoming presidency played down prospects of expansive future work on the topic.
Context: Article 42.7 of the EU’s treaty calls for member states to provide “aid and assistance” if another “is the victim of armed aggression”. Nato’s Article 5 mutual defence clause has provided Europe’s security for eight decades, but that has been called into question by US President Donald Trump.
Cyprus, a non-Nato state which holds the rotating presidency of the EU, pushed for a debate on how Article 42.7 might be operationalised after a drone was fired at the island in March.
EU chief diplomat Kaja Kallas oversaw a “tabletop exercise” by senior EU diplomats earlier this month to war game how Article 42.7 would work following an attack on an EU state that is or is not a Nato member, or a hybrid attack below the threshold to trigger an armed response.
But since then, there’s been no feedback or outcomes published, and the previously bombastic rhetoric from EU leaders has subsided.
Ireland, also a non-Nato EU state, will take the presidency from Cyprus in July. Helen McEntee, its foreign and defence minister, suggested it was unlikely to prioritise continued deliberations on Article 42.7.
“We’re not going to stop any debate, but I think from our perspective, Ireland’s involvement, or Ireland’s kind of engagement in it, is difficult,” she told reporters. “I think maybe the approach and even the language that we’re hearing at the European level . . . goes beyond what I think people would be comfortable with at home.”
The follow-up from the tabletop exercise is unclear. Kallas told reporters earlier this month that a meeting of EU defence ministers did not address it, but that it should be discussed at an informal gathering of foreign ministers that begins tonight in Cyprus.
Even European Commission president Ursula von der Leyen, who in February called for Article 42.7 to be brought “to life”, has toned down her rhetoric.
Speaking yesterday in Vilnius after talks with Baltic leaders on the spate of military drone incidents blamed on Russian interference, she did not cite the mutual defence clause.
“Member states facing such [hybrid] threats should be able to count on European solidarity. This is why I believe that Europe should develop a protocol for such hybrid situations. It would enable rapid mobilisation of all available EU instruments,” she said.
