@Lazycog @eighthave indeed. And AFAIR the neutrality of #Finland after #WWII was, basically, forced by conditions of negotiations rather than voluntarily chosen. And now Finland decided to join #NATO - probably because they remember their history quite good.
The purpose of soviet invasion to Hungary and Czechoslovakia was completely different.
@nanoelquant @Lazycog@mastodon.online Austria's neutrality was also forced by a deal between the Soviet Union, France, UK, and USA. But it has worked, and is immensely popular in Austria now. Finland's situation now is quite different than both Ukraine and Austria. Finland was already spending more on than NATO's 2% requirement, and it has a long border with Russia. It will be interesting to see how the Finns feel about NATO when they have to join in some pointless yet devastating invasion like Afghanistan.
@eighthave @Lazycog "But it has worked" when you don't lock your door, but there is no thief, technically it also "works".
Before ca. 1990, there was actually no choice for Austria, then before ca.2000 there was no need (the Cold war was like "won"), later there was no sense (Austria found itself mostly between democratic EU/NATO which would obviously not plan invasion). Technically, the discussion now is purely theoretical, even if hypothetically russia occupies Poland and Czechia, the formal Austria status would not be too much important anymore (I mean, that the course of military actions on such scale would be barely dependent on formal questions).
But the things are notably dependent on the geographic location.
@nanoelquant @Lazycog@mastodon.online yes exactly, Austria was forced by military invasion and occupation to become neutral. That occupation was mostly Russians and directed from Moscow. Now, neutrality is immensely popular with Austrians, and all but one minor political party fully support it. It can work very well, much better than any military alliance, so #Ukraine really should keep it in consideration, especially because its clear they won't be allowed into #NATO any time soon.
@eighthave @Lazycog you contradict yourself. People hated it and could not remove it - it IS limiting their freedom. Well, maybe you just like soviets and russians, so it does not limit *your* freedom, but from what you have told other Austians have different meanings.
@eighthave @nanoelquant @Lazycog it is just working, because we are surrounded by friendly neighbors. And it could lead to serious problems as soon as things change. Ukraine was defacto neutral too. Until Russia started the war.
@eighthave @Lazycog I think that not Austrians will decide when NATO will consider acception of new members or other forms of collaboration.
Neutrality is not about absence of 'fast ticket' somewhere, it is about strategic plans for decades ahead - in this question, what is the point to declare " we will be neutral forever"? Unless you are surrounded by NATO countries, surely.
Right now Ukraine implements NATO military standards just to be able to use Western military assistance - so, the coherence is *already* vital, isn't it?
@nanoelquant @eighthave @Lazycog
Austria joining NATO would also be about contributing to the common defense of democratic Europe. And Austria would need to clean house in terms of the free-for-all security/spying situation in Vienna.
Essentially Austria is not neutral right now, we just simply refuse to contribute our fair share. It’s very convenient to say “ah but we’re neutral” and not have to deal with strategic decisions.
@szbalint @nanoelquant @Lazycog@mastodon.online That logic presumes that NATO decreases war. The evidence is pretty clear that NATO just shifts wars outside of NATO. That is not anything I think a democratic and anti-war Europe should take part in. That line of reasoning is exactly what the PR firms of NATO weapons industry is spending lots of money pushing. Austria contributes by supporting global diplomacy, there is a good reason why things like the Iran Nuclear Deal is handled in Vienna.
@szbalint @nanoelquant @Lazycog@mastodon.online The hard part is that there is big money in selling weapons, and not for selling neutrality and peace. That gives the military industrial complexes around the world big money to spend to sway opinions to keep the money gushing towards weapons, both in #NATO and in #Russia. And more NATO members means more money to spend on proxy wars like Ukraine, Iraq, Syria, Libya, Afghanistan, etc.
@eighthave @szbalint @Lazycog yep, Austria is being home for a number of international useless organizations. And allows russians to freely spy on them and corrupt them even further, as recent reports stay. These organizations do fail badly in prevention and solving of wars. And they are definitely not a mean of protection of Austrian territory.
Wars originate not from defensive unions, but from will of bad people to solve issues by war.
Try to pontificate about disarming and evil military corporations making big money in russia first. You will be surprised how severely their "peacemaking stuff" they proclaim on export is prosecuted inside the country.
If your enemy starts a war against you, you must be armed better than it, period. Otherwise, you will be not peacemaking, but just disarmed for its convenience.
@eighthave @szbalint @Lazycog moreover, I see we are really on completely different pages if the war of russia against UA is "NATO proxy war" for you first. For Ukrainians, this is the war for existence, and it is not a pathetic slogan - unfortunately.
@nanoelquant @szbalint Austria lets anyone spy on any foreigners. We have at least two NSA spy bases, for example. If you single out Russian spying in Austria, you're only seeing a tiny piece of the whole story. Usually that point of view comes from people pushing a specific agenda rather than sticking to the facts and history.
War is not the only defense, for example, India kicking the British out, Czechoslovakia freeing themselves from Soviets and Communism, and so many other examples. 1/
@nanoelquant @szbalint Erica Chenoweth is a researcher with a military background, her research showed that non-violent struggle between 1900-2006 was twice as likely to succeed as violent struggle. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YJSehRlU34w 2/
@eighthave @szbalint Nice research with a crucial flaw - it could work throughout the world, but with russia the situation is significantly different.
@eighthave @szbalint "We have at least two NSA spy bases, for example" so what?
I see you decided to ignore the rest of the stuff which is not a convenient "agenda" for you.
"War is not the only defense"
The worst thing is your home never be on the border with russia. Without that, all you prophesies is a pure scholasticism. Exactly the main point of the post which I have shared initially.
Well, if after all this is only a "pushing specific agenda", I think we are over here.
@eighthave @nanoelquant @Lazycog I think Ukraine's NATO membership will depend on how the war ends and whether it is the people's democratically expressed wish. If Russia is in turmoil I think NATO membership would offer more stability to the region.
@peterjsefton @nanoelquant I agree that it all hangs on how the war ends. Perhaps NATO could bring stability there. Based on the past decades, it looks more likely that NATO countries would continue to push for instability in Russia if they think they can get away with it. And if Putin falls, it looks like a sure thing that NATO countries will be pushing to help choose the successor, like in the early 90s. I think stability in the region would require a stalemate with a negotiated peace.
@eighthave @peterjsefton "I think stability in the region would require a stalemate with a negotiated peace" You think wrong. Because we have had a negotiated peace, recognition of borders, strategic friendship, security assurances and all other bullshit. In 2014 russians wiped their asses by the long list of such papers, which would probably not even fit to one post here, and did what it did. So no, we need more solid guarantees, and the history shows that there are only three things able to stop them - weapon, weapon, and even more weapon. Practical security assistance would also help.
And two more things. 1st - the person of putin is not crucial there, when he dies, it will not necessary mark any chances to better. Sorry not sorry, I unfortunately know russian language and therefore can read what they are writing. putin dies, they will appoint some kadyrov, prigozhin or another moron. 2nd - we don't necessarily need stability in russia. If permanent instability keeps them weak and locked within their borders - great.
@nanoelquant @Lazycog@mastodon.online we also have a giant monument in one of the main squares of #Vienna thanking the #Soviet army for liberating us. We have to keep it forever as part of the treaty that ended the occupation. People hated it for a long time, but in the end, it does not really limit our freedom, and it was an important symbol for the #Soviets. I think that it was a brilliant move by the Austrian negotiators to accept it.