DOCSLIB.ORG

Final Conclusion

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Final Conclusion 887 X . FINAL CONCLUSION 1 . THE LONG ROAD TO BRUSSELS: ATTEMPTS, FAILURES AND SUCCESSES – EXTERNAL AND INTERNAL FACTORS In the wake of World War I, four great European empires collapsed, and specifically, in chronological order, the Russian Tsarist Empire (1917), the German Empire of the Kaiser (1918), the Habsburg Monarchy (1918), and the Ottoman Empire (1922–23). The political, economic, and psychological consequences for those generations of people who were accustomed to living in those great empires over centuries proved to be catastrophics. That was true in particular for the empire on the Danube. It was not by chance that the “Paneurope” construct of ideas and the movement accompanied by it which had been initiated by Count Richard N. Coudenhove-Kalergi found very fertile ground in Vienna, where the collapse and end of the Habsburg empire was felt especially bitterly in its capital. Added to this was the forced Treaty of Saint-Germain (1919) as a foiled Austrian state treaty, which had to be painfully perceived as the outcome of the bankrupt assets of the empire on the Danube. The new republican order was a founding of a state against its will (see chapter I). It was not “Europe”, but rather the German Reich that was regarded as provid- ing room for hope and a future, as was expressed in the Anschluss movement of the 1920s. The victorious powers attempted to suppress this both with the Geneva Protocols (1922) and through the Lausanne Loans (1932) and to cover it with a prohibition against Anschluss of, in each case, twenty years (up to 1942 and 1952, respectively). As a result of these dictates, the idea of “Europe” was not much more popular in Vienna (see chapter II, subchapters 3 and 8). While Ignaz Seipel flirted with the idea of Central Europe (Mitteleuropa), Johannes Schober was more oriented towards the German Reich. “Paneurope” remained a pipe dream. In contrast to that, the Central Europe project already had something of a more realistic effect. It was, however, likewise doomed to failure as a result of differences of opinion between the neighbor countries in the Danube region that came into question with it in the area of conflict between a broad reaching dependency of Austria upon the League of Nations and only restricted sovereignty with a view towards Fascist Italy and Nazi Germany in the 1930s. The loss of the Central Europe idea for Austria was also tied to Seipel’s departure from the political stage in 1931–32. Interestingly enough, this also corresponded 888 X. Final Conclusion with the German-Austrian customs union project that was advocated by Schober through the process of secret diplomacy (see chapter II, subchapter 7). The German Reich also continued to remain a fixed point for Austria’s foreign policy in the 1930s. While Berlin pushed for a bilateral customs union, Vienna vacillated and remained undecided until an indiscretion there in the matter which had been kept secret provoked international condemnation and caused the plan’s downfall. France and Czechoslovakia immediately lodged a protest against the customs union project. After the Briand Plan of 1930 was received by both Germany and Austria with comments ranging from reservations to rejection, the Tardieu Plan of 1932 for the formation of a confederation of all of the states neighboring the Danube came too late to still have any chance at realization. Aus- tria was already too closely tied to Rome, and it was then willing to move forward in a consistent manner with the “Rome Protocols”, an alliance with both Fascist Italy and revisionist Hungary. Italy’s Abyssinian War starting in 1935 put Austria completely on the defensive, and the July Agreement with Nazi Germany (1936) turned it into a satellite with only a limited lifespan (chapter II, subchapters 8, 9). The Austrian exile comprised both the period of the authoritarian corporative state (Ständestaat) (1934–1938) and Hitler’s totalitarian dictatorship (1938–45). It gathered in Brno, Brussels, Paris, London, New York, and Moscow and was correspondingly dispersed, disparate, ideologically heterogeneous, and politically disunited, such that during all these years, no unified government-in-exile was achieved. The debates revolved around greater German solutions and small Aus- trian constructs. For one group, and specifically the socialists, Austria should still belong to a (socialist) German nation that had been freed of fascism in order to realize the all-German revolution within a socialist Europe that had already been hoped for back in 1918–19. For the other group, christian socials and monarchists, a Danube federation, the Habsburg restoration, or a “Southern German league of states” were topics, while the communists were the first to speak out for a separate and independent Austria. But for all of the exile groups involved, Europe as a topic was on the whole only a subordinate theme and consequently a second-class one (chapter II, subchapters 11 and 12). During the period from 1945–47 through 1953, decisions were made that would set the course for the future. The first steps were taken in the direction of cooperation with Western European governments. With the formulation and propagation of the victim thesis in 1945–46, not only could the demand for the return of South Tyrol be justified, good legitimization could also be found for re- ceiving foreign aid (funds by UNRRA, GARIOA, Interim and Extended Interim Aid, and the ERP). The integral South Tyrol matter could not, however, be pushed through. Rather, there was only a questionable autonomy solution in 1948 which was followed by decades of strife. The victim status of Austria that was success- fully asserted also supported the special case thesis in terms of Western orienta- tion policy. Its participation in the Marshall Plan had priority and in 1947–48, that 1. The Long Road to Brussels: Attempts, Failures and Successes 889 was more important than the concluding of the State Treaty. The preservation of a unified state in a divided Europe through the validity of the ERP for the entire country ranked in significance ahead of the conclusive resolution of Austria’s in- ternational status. A search for balance that was always a difficult one along with a tightrope act between East and West were necessary in order to maintain the Four Powers consensus in Austria or not to threaten it. That also led to that fact that membership in NATO had to in no way come into question and in the best case, only a ‟secret” (pseudo) partnership with the West could exist in terms of security policy (chapter III, subchapters 3, 4, 5, 6). Towards the end of the war, Coudenhove-Kalergi returned from exile in the US and settled at first in Gstaad in the Berner Oberland in Switzerland, where he advocated for the idea of a European Parliamentary Union. In a sort of pincer movement between American reconstruction aid and parliamentary involvement, he hoped for the creation of a movement for a European constitution, which was not to be fulfilled. In the meantime, the ERP mutated from a welfare and aid program into a reconstruction and modernization program for Austria. Its West- ern orientation took place through the process of trade liberalization within the framework of the OEEC starting from 1948 and of GATT from 1951. But the ERP was also effective through the counterpart funds. Through its membership in the European Payment’s Union (EPU), Austria had participated early on in a multilateral balance of payments in Western Europe. Within that context, a clear reorientation took place of Austrian foreign trade in the direction of the West and the more or less secret handling of the US embargo policy against the East. What was conspicuous and considered by France and the Soviet Union in an increasing- ly critical manner was also the interweaving of trade and economic policy with the Federal Republic of Germany that was becoming closer and closer, which was a result of the cessation of trade with Central and Eastern parts of Europe and which threatened to turn Austria into an appendage of West Germany (chap- ter III, subchapters 7, 8, 9). Against the background of the German question that had remained open (1952–55), Austria, with the maintaining of the Four Powers administration, appeared in contrast to be a good example for its solution. An initial cautious ap- proach with the Council of Europe began early on: there was an Austrian observer status in the Consultative Assembly by the Nationalrat starting in 1949 and then by the Federal Government from 1953 with Eduard Ludwig (ÖVP) and Bruno Pittermann (SPÖ). Austria also occupied the same position with the High Author- ity of the European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC) when with Carl Bobleter (ÖVP) and Fritz Kolb (SPÖ), coalition representation that was proportionally bal- anced was also established in Luxembourg (chapter III, subchapters 10, 11). During the period between 1953 and 1960, decisions were once again made by the Austrian side that would set the course for the future and which would carry significance up to the end of the 1980s. In contrast to later years, there 890 X. Final Conclusion was a party consensus on Europe policy that only diversified in the following period. After the end of the Marshall Plan program in 1953, when new options emerged for a concluding of the State Treaty, Austria stopped further steps to- wards integration with the ECSC in 1954. In the spring of 1955, Austria made use of the window of opportunity for the finalizing and signing of the State Treaty through a “ One-Plus-Four” solution with the four occupying powers. The Austria solution with the State Treaty and neutrality also triggered a multifaceted inter- nal and international debate about the possibility of a model case for Germany with which, however, Vienna behaved in a restrained manner: new complica- tions were to be avoided, but before 1955 movement was in many cases in the shadow of the German question, which was more important to the victorious powers than Austria was.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Death of an Institution: the End for Western European Union, a Future
    DEATH OF AN INSTITUTION The end for Western European Union, a future for European defence? EGMONT PAPER 46 DEATH OF AN INSTITUTION The end for Western European Union, a future for European defence? ALYSON JK BAILES AND GRAHAM MESSERVY-WHITING May 2011 The Egmont Papers are published by Academia Press for Egmont – The Royal Institute for International Relations. Founded in 1947 by eminent Belgian political leaders, Egmont is an independent think-tank based in Brussels. Its interdisciplinary research is conducted in a spirit of total academic freedom. A platform of quality information, a forum for debate and analysis, a melting pot of ideas in the field of international politics, Egmont’s ambition – through its publications, seminars and recommendations – is to make a useful contribution to the decision- making process. *** President: Viscount Etienne DAVIGNON Director-General: Marc TRENTESEAU Series Editor: Prof. Dr. Sven BISCOP *** Egmont – The Royal Institute for International Relations Address Naamsestraat / Rue de Namur 69, 1000 Brussels, Belgium Phone 00-32-(0)2.223.41.14 Fax 00-32-(0)2.223.41.16 E-mail [email protected] Website: www.egmontinstitute.be © Academia Press Eekhout 2 9000 Gent Tel. 09/233 80 88 Fax 09/233 14 09 [email protected] www.academiapress.be J. Story-Scientia NV Wetenschappelijke Boekhandel Sint-Kwintensberg 87 B-9000 Gent Tel. 09/225 57 57 Fax 09/233 14 09 [email protected] www.story.be All authors write in a personal capacity. Lay-out: proxess.be ISBN 978 90 382 1785 7 D/2011/4804/136 U 1612 NUR1 754 All rights reserved.
    [Show full text]
  • Building an Unwanted Nation: the Anglo-American Partnership and Austrian Proponents of a Separate Nationhood, 1918-1934
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Carolina Digital Repository BUILDING AN UNWANTED NATION: THE ANGLO-AMERICAN PARTNERSHIP AND AUSTRIAN PROPONENTS OF A SEPARATE NATIONHOOD, 1918-1934 Kevin Mason A dissertation submitted to the faculty of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of PhD in the Department of History. Chapel Hill 2007 Approved by: Advisor: Dr. Christopher Browning Reader: Dr. Konrad Jarausch Reader: Dr. Lloyd Kramer Reader: Dr. Michael Hunt Reader: Dr. Terence McIntosh ©2007 Kevin Mason ALL RIGHTS RESERVED ii ABSTRACT Kevin Mason: Building an Unwanted Nation: The Anglo-American Partnership and Austrian Proponents of a Separate Nationhood, 1918-1934 (Under the direction of Dr. Christopher Browning) This project focuses on American and British economic, diplomatic, and cultural ties with Austria, and particularly with internal proponents of Austrian independence. Primarily through loans to build up the economy and diplomatic pressure, the United States and Great Britain helped to maintain an independent Austrian state and prevent an Anschluss or union with Germany from 1918 to 1934. In addition, this study examines the minority of Austrians who opposed an Anschluss . The three main groups of Austrians that supported independence were the Christian Social Party, monarchists, and some industries and industrialists. These Austrian nationalists cooperated with the Americans and British in sustaining an unwilling Austrian nation. Ultimately, the global depression weakened American and British capacity to practice dollar and pound diplomacy, and the popular appeal of Hitler combined with Nazi Germany’s aggression led to the realization of the Anschluss .
    [Show full text]
  • CONTEMPORARY AUSTRIAN STUDIES Volume 18
    The Schüssel Era in Austria Günter Bischof, Fritz Plasser (Eds.) CONTEMPORARY AUSTRIAN STUDIES Volume 18 innsbruck university press Copyright ©2010 by University of New Orleans Press, New Orleans, Louisiana, USA. All rights reserved under International and Pan-American Copyright Conventions. No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopy, recording, or any information storage and retrieval system, without prior permission in writing from the publisher. All inquiries should be addressed to UNO Press, University of New Orleans, ED 210, 2000 Lakeshore Drive, New Orleans, LA, 70119, USA. www.unopress.org. Printed in the United States of America. Published and distributed in the United States by Published and distributed in Europe by University of New Orleans Press: Innsbruck University Press: ISBN 978-1-60801-009-7 ISBN 978-3-902719-29-4 Library of Congress Control Number: 2009936824 Contemporary Austrian Studies Sponsored by the University of New Orleans and Universität Innsbruck Editors Günter Bischof, CenterAustria, University of New Orleans Fritz Plasser, Universität Innsbruck Production Editor Copy Editor Assistant Editor Ellen Palli Jennifer Shimek Michael Maier Universität Innsbruck Loyola University, New Orleans UNO/Vienna Executive Editors Franz Mathis, Universität Innsbruck Susan Krantz, University of New Orleans Advisory Board Siegfried Beer Sándor Kurtán Universität Graz Corvinus University Budapest Peter Berger Günther Pallaver Wirtschaftsuniversität
    [Show full text]
  • Wolfgang Schüssel – Bundeskanzler Regierungsstil Und Führungsverhalten“
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by OTHES DIPLOMARBEIT Titel der Diplomarbeit: „Wolfgang Schüssel – Bundeskanzler Regierungsstil und Führungsverhalten“ Wahrnehmungen, Sichtweisen und Attributionen des inneren Führungszirkels der Österreichischen Volkspartei Verfasser: Mag. Martin Prikoszovich angestrebter akademischer Grad Magister der Philosophie (Mag. phil.) Wien, 2012 Studienkennzahl lt. Studienblatt: A 300 Studienrichtung lt. Studienblatt: Politikwissenschaft Betreuer: Univ.-Doz. Dr. Johann Wimmer Persönliche Erklärung Ich erkläre hiermit, dass ich die vorliegende schriftliche Arbeit selbstständig verfertigt habe und dass die verwendete Literatur bzw. die verwendeten Quellen von mir korrekt und in nachprüfbarer Weise zitiert worden sind. Mir ist bewusst, dass ich bei einem Verstoß gegen diese Regeln mit Konsequenzen zu rechnen habe. Mag. Martin Prikoszovich Wien, am __________ ______________________________ Datum Unterschrift 2 Inhaltsverzeichnis 1 Danksagung 5 2 Einleitung 6 2.1 Gegenstand der Arbeit 6 2.2. Wissenschaftliches Erkenntnisinteresse und zentrale Forschungsfrage 7 3 Politische Führung im geschichtlichen Kontext 8 3.1 Antike (Platon, Aristoteles, Demosthenes) 9 3.2 Niccolò Machiavelli 10 4 Strukturmerkmale des Regierens 10 4.1 Verhandlungs- und Wettbewerbsdemokratie 12 4.2 Konsensdemokratie/Konkordanzdemokratie/Proporzdemokratie 15 4.3 Konfliktdemokratie/Konkurrenzdemokratie 16 4.4 Kanzlerdemokratie 18 4.4.1 Bundeskanzler Deutschland vs. Bundeskanzler Österreich 18 4.4.1.1 Der österreichische Bundeskanzler 18 4.4.1.2. Der Bundeskanzler in Deutschland 19 4.5 Parteiendemokratie 21 4.6 Koalitionsdemokratie 23 4.7 Mediendemokratie 23 5 Politische Führung und Regierungsstil 26 5.1 Zusammenfassung und Ausblick 35 6 Die Österreichische Volkspartei 35 6.1 Die Struktur der ÖVP 36 6.1.1. Der Wirtschaftsbund 37 6.1.2.
    [Show full text]
  • Global Austria Austria’S Place in Europe and the World
    Global Austria Austria’s Place in Europe and the World Günter Bischof, Fritz Plasser (Eds.) Anton Pelinka, Alexander Smith, Guest Editors CONTEMPORARY AUSTRIAN STUDIES | Volume 20 innsbruck university press Copyright ©2011 by University of New Orleans Press, New Orleans, Louisiana, USA. All rights reserved under International and Pan-American Copyright Conventions. No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopy, recording, or any information storage and retrieval system, without prior permission in writing from the publisher. All inquiries should be addressed to UNO Press, University of New Orleans, ED 210, 2000 Lakeshore Drive, New Orleans, LA, 70119, USA. www.unopress.org. Book design: Lindsay Maples Cover cartoon by Ironimus (1992) provided by the archives of Die Presse in Vienna and permission to publish granted by Gustav Peichl. Published in North America by Published in Europe by University of New Orleans Press Innsbruck University Press ISBN 978-1-60801-062-2 ISBN 978-3-9028112-0-2 Contemporary Austrian Studies Sponsored by the University of New Orleans and Universität Innsbruck Editors Günter Bischof, CenterAustria, University of New Orleans Fritz Plasser, Universität Innsbruck Production Editor Copy Editor Bill Lavender Lindsay Maples University of New Orleans University of New Orleans Executive Editors Klaus Frantz, Universität Innsbruck Susan Krantz, University of New Orleans Advisory Board Siegfried Beer Helmut Konrad Universität Graz Universität
    [Show full text]
  • The J. William Fulbright Prize for International Understanding
    The J. William Fulbright Prize for International Understanding Honoring Angela Merkel Chancellor of Germany Award Ceremony January 28, 2019 Berlin, Germany J. William F ulbright Prize | 1 The J. William Fulbright Prize for Evening Program Peace and Understanding 6:00-8:30 pm The Fulbright Prize was established to honor the largest and Performance by Fulbright Jazz Ensemble, featuring Sara Decker, Julian Hesse, most significant educational exchange program in history, as Hagen Möller, Tom Berkmann, Martin Terens, and Matt Jacobson. well as the career and spirit of its creator, the late Senator J. William Fulbright. The Prize recognizes and rewards outstanding 6:00 pm – Awards Ceremony contributions toward bringing peoples, cultures, or nations to Welcome — Manfred Philipp, Past President, Board of Directors greater understanding of others. The Fulbright Prize was initially supported by a generous grant from the Coca-Cola Foundation. Remarks — Oliver Schmidt, Executive Director The Prize is now supported by the J. William Fulbright Prize German-American Fulbright Commission Endowment, a fund created with a bequest from the late John B. — Fulbright Alum Hurford, a former Fulbright Association officer and director. The Prize event is supported by sponsorships and contributions from Video Message — Renée Fleming, Soprano, Fulbright Alumna, and Fulbright alumni and friends around the world. Lifetime Achievement Awardee Prize Remarks — Mary Ellen Heian Schmider, Prize Committee Chair The J. William Fulbright Prize for International Understanding inaugural winner was former South African President Nelson Introduction of Prize Laureate — Christiane Amanpour, Journalist Mandela (1993). Four recipients of the Fulbright Prize, Nelson Mandela, Jimmy Carter, Kofi Annan, and Martti Ahtisaari, were Presentation of the J.
    [Show full text]
  • „Österreich Ist Frei !“
    „Österreich ist frei !“ Der österreichische Staatsvertrag 1955 Ein Unterrichtsleitfaden Die Schlacht um Österreich Am 29. März 1945, Gründonnerstag, überschreiten alliierte Verbände erstmals die heutige österreichische Grenze im mittleren Burgenland. Es sind Verbände der Roten Armee (3. Ukrainische Front) unter Marschall Fjodor I. Tolbuchin. In ihrem Gepäck: Flugblätter, in denen sie sich zu „Befreiern“ vom NS-Regime erklären und Bezüge zur Moskauer Deklaration von 1943 herstellen. Die militärische Zangenbewegung der Roten Armee geht in Richtung Wien (Schlacht um Wien 6.–13. April 1945). Zu Ostern stehen sowjetische Truppen schon 30 Kilometer vor Graz. Schwere Kämpfe in der Oststeiermark, im „Jogl- land“ und in Niederösterreich bis Kriegsende. DER EHEMALIGE STAATS- KANZLER KARL RENNER WIRD VON DEN SOWJETS IM AUFTRAG STALINS GESUCHT. ER NIMMT ZUGLEICH VON SICH AUS MIT IHNEN KONTAKT AUF; RENNER Kämpfe in Wien, WIRD ZUR SCHLÜSSELFIGUR DER an der Badner- WIEDERERRICHTUNG DER Bahn, April 1945 ZWEITEN REPUBLIK. © Votava Die Moskauer Deklaration vom 31. Oktober 1943: „Die Regierungen des Vereinigten Königreiches, der Sowjetunion und der Ver- einigten Staaten von Amerika sind darin einer Meinung, daß Österreich, das erste freie Land, das der typischen Angriffspolitik Hitlers zum Opfer fallen sollte, von deutscher Herrschaft befreit werden soll. Sie betrachten die Besetzung Österreichs durch Deutschland am 15. März 1938 als null und nichtig. Sie betrachten sich durch keinerlei Änderungen, die in Österreich seit diesem Zeitpunkt durchgeführt wurden, als irgendwie ge- bunden. Sie erklären, daß sie wünschen, ein freies unabhängiges Österreich wiederhergestellt zu sehen und dadurch ebensosehr den Österreichern selbst wie den Nachbarstaaten, die sich ähnlichen Problemen gegenübergestellt sehen werden, die Bahn zu ebnen, auf der sie die politische und wirtschaft- liche Sicherheit finden können, die die einzige Grundlage für einen dauernden Frieden ist.
    [Show full text]
  • Postwar Austria and the Jewish Refugees. the Role of the Exile Studies in Coming to Terms with the Past
    Demokratiezentrum Wien Onlinequelle: www.demokratiezentrum.org source: Unpublished manuscript, Vienna/Lubbock, TX 2004. Sonja Niederacher Postwar Austria and the Jewish Refugees. The Role of the Exile Studies in coming to Terms with the Past In this paper I am going to give an outline of the development of Austrian politics and society. I am focusing on how Austria has dealt with its National Socialist past from the postwar era until today and I am comparing this to the history of Exile Studies. Exile Studies is the discipline that explores the forced emigration of people, mostly Jews, who were persecuted by the Nazis. Unlike Germany where Nazi oppression rose gradually from 1933 onwards, the ‘Anschluss’ Austria’s to the German Reich in March 1938 came all of a sudden over the Jewish community. Approximately 120,000 out of 180,000 people were lucky enough to be able to escape the Nazi persecution in Vienna. The persecution was so brutal that Vienna gathered the status of a Model-city within the German Reich.1 And it affected not only Jews but also political activists, Communists and Social Democrats as well as members and supporters of the Dollfuss and Schuschnigg governments. Some were both, Jewish and political opponents, which put them into even greater danger.2 Most of them fled first to other European countries, to Great Britain, France or the Scandinavia. As the Germans succeeded to occupy big parts of Europe, the refugees had to get overseas, above all to the United States, Latin America, and Palestine. In most countries of Exile, intellectuals, artists and politicians among the refugees built up organizations in order to support their compatriots and also to set a political signal of opposition against Nazi-oppression.
    [Show full text]
  • "The Greeks in the History of the Black Sea" Report
    DGIV/EDU/HIST (2000) 01 Activities for the Development and Consolidation of Democratic Stability (ADACS) Meeting of Experts on "The Greeks in the History of the Black Sea" Thessaloniki, Greece, 2-4December 1999 Report Strasbourg Meeting of Experts on "The Greeks in the History of the Black Sea" Thessaloniki, Greece, 2-4December 1999 Report The opinions expressed in this work are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official policy of the Council of Europe. CONTENTS INTRODUCTION..................................................................................................... 5 Introductory remarks by James WIMBERLEY, Head of the Technical Cooperation and Assistance Section, Directorate of Education and Higher Education.................................................................................................................... 6 PRESENTATIONS -Dr Zofia Halina ARCHIBALD........................................................................11 -Dr Emmanuele CURTI ....................................................................................14 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Dr Constantinos CHATZOPOULOS..........................................................................17 APPENDIX I LIST OF PARTICIPANTS.........................................................................................21 APPENDIX II PROGRAMME OF THE SEMINAR.........................................................................26 APPENDIX III INTRODUCTORY PRESENTATION BY PROFESSOR ARTEMIS XANTHOPOULOU-KYRIAKOU.............................................................................30
    [Show full text]
  • The Marshall Plan in Austria 69
    CAS XXV CONTEMPORARY AUSTRIANAUSTRIAN STUDIES STUDIES | VOLUME VOLUME 25 25 This volume celebrates the study of Austria in the twentieth century by historians, political scientists and social scientists produced in the previous twenty-four volumes of Contemporary Austrian Studies. One contributor from each of the previous volumes has been asked to update the state of scholarship in the field addressed in the respective volume. The title “Austrian Studies Today,” then, attempts to reflect the state of the art of historical and social science related Bischof, Karlhofer (Eds.) • Austrian Studies Today studies of Austria over the past century, without claiming to be comprehensive. The volume thus covers many important themes of Austrian contemporary history and politics since the collapse of the Habsburg Monarchy in 1918—from World War I and its legacies, to the rise of authoritarian regimes in the 1930s and 1940s, to the reconstruction of republican Austria after World War II, the years of Grand Coalition governments and the Kreisky era, all the way to Austria joining the European Union in 1995 and its impact on Austria’s international status and domestic politics. EUROPE USA Austrian Studies Studies Today Today GünterGünter Bischof,Bischof, Ferdinand Ferdinand Karlhofer Karlhofer (Eds.) (Eds.) UNO UNO PRESS innsbruck university press UNO PRESS UNO PRESS innsbruck university press Austrian Studies Today Günter Bischof, Ferdinand Karlhofer (Eds.) CONTEMPORARY AUSTRIAN STUDIES | VOLUME 25 UNO PRESS innsbruck university press Copyright © 2016 by University of New Orleans Press All rights reserved under International and Pan-American Copyright Conventions. No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted in any form, or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopy, recording, or any information storage nd retrieval system, without prior permission in writing from the publisher.
    [Show full text]
  • Forced Labor in Austria Late Recognition History Tragic Fates
    Fund for Reconciliation, Peace and 19381945 Cooperation:Forced Labor in Austria Late Recognition History Tragic Fates Hubert Feichtlbauer Imprint Austrian Reconciliation Fund (Publisher) Hubert Feichtlbauer (Author) Scientific Advisor Univ. Doz. Florian Freund German Edition: ISBN: 3-901116-21-4 English Edition: ISBN: 3-901116-22-2 Published in German, English, Polish and Russian Printed by Rema Print, Neulerchenfelder Straße 35, A-1160 Vienna, on 100% chlorine-free bleached paper The book, the title, the cover design and all symbols and illustrations used are protected by copyright. All rights reserved, in particular with regard to the translation, reproduction, extraction of photomechanical or similar material and storage in data processing media either in full or in part. Despite careful research, no responsibility is accepted for the correctness of the information contained in this book. In order to ensure the readability of the texts and lists, gender-specific formulations were frequently dispensed with. Quotes from individuals and legal documents were translated solely for the purposes of this publication. No liability is accepted for translation, typesetting and printing errors. www.reconciliationfund.at © 2005 2 Schopenhauerstraße 36, A-1180 Vienna www.braintrust.at Contents 1. ›Preface‹ 5 Wolfgang Schüssel, Maria Schaumayer, Ludwig Steiner, Richard Wotava; About This Book 2. ›Guilt and Atonement‹ 17 3. ›Racism and Exploitation‹ 41 4. ›Every Case a Tragic Fate‹ 71 5. ›Why Such a Late Issue?‹ 127 6. ›The State and the Business Community
    [Show full text]
  • Austrian Federalism in Comparative Perspective
    CONTEMPORARY AUSTRIAN STUDIES | VOLUME 24 Bischof, Karlhofer (Eds.), Williamson (Guest Ed.) • 1914: Aus tria-Hungary, the Origins, and the First Year of World War I War of World the Origins, and First Year tria-Hungary, Austrian Federalism in Comparative Perspective Günter Bischof AustrianFerdinand Federalism Karlhofer (Eds.) in Comparative Perspective Günter Bischof, Ferdinand Karlhofer (Eds.) UNO UNO PRESS innsbruck university press UNO PRESS innsbruck university press Austrian Federalism in ŽŵƉĂƌĂƟǀĞWĞƌƐƉĞĐƟǀĞ Günter Bischof, Ferdinand Karlhofer (Eds.) CONTEMPORARY AUSTRIAN STUDIES | VOLUME 24 UNO PRESS innsbruck university press Copyright © 2015 by University of New Orleans Press All rights reserved under International and Pan-American Copyright Conventions. No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted in any form, or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopy, recording, or any information storage nd retrieval system, without prior permission in writing from the publisher. All inquiries should be addressed to UNO Press, University of New Orleans, LA 138, 2000 Lakeshore Drive. New Orleans, LA, 70148, USA. www.unopress.org. Printed in the United States of America Book design by Allison Reu and Alex Dimeff Cover photo © Parlamentsdirektion Published in the United States by Published and distributed in Europe University of New Orleans Press by Innsbruck University Press ISBN: 9781608011124 ISBN: 9783902936691 UNO PRESS Publication of this volume has been made possible through generous grants from the the Federal Ministry for Europe, Integration, and Foreign Affairs in Vienna through the Austrian Cultural Forum in New York, as well as the Federal Ministry of Economics, Science, and Research through the Austrian Academic Exchange Service (ÖAAD). The Austrian Marshall Plan Anniversary Foundation in Vienna has been very generous in supporting Center Austria: The Austrian Marshall Plan Center for European Studies at the University of New Orleans and its publications series.
    [Show full text]